Sex-Based Differences in Severe Outcomes, Including Cardiovascular Hospitalization, in Adults With COVID-19 in Ontario, Canada.

Background: While men have experienced higher risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to women, an analysis of sex differences by age in severe outcomes during the acute phase of infection is lacking. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess heterogeneity in severe outcome risks by age and sex by conducting a retrospective cohort study of community-dwelling adults in Ontario who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection during the first 3 waves. Methods: Adjusted odds ratios were estimated using multilevel multivariable logistic regression models including an interaction term for age and sex. The primary outcome was a composite of severe outcomes (hospitalization for a cardiovascular (CV) event, intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, or death) within 30 days. Results: Among 30,736, 199,132, and 186,131 adults who tested positive during the first 3 waves, 1,908 (6.2%), 5,437 (2.7%), and 5,653 (3.0%) experienced a severe outcome within 30 days. For all outcomes, the sex-specific risk depended on age (all P for interaction <0.05). Men with SARS-CoV-2 infection experienced a higher risk of outcomes than infected women of the same age, except for the risk of all-cause hospitalization being higher for young women than men (ages 18-45 years) during waves 2 and 3. The sex disparity in CV hospitalization across all ages either persisted or increased with each subsequent wave. Conclusions: To mitigate risks in subsequent waves, it is helpful to further understand the factors that contribute to the generally higher risks faced by men across all ages, and the persistent or increasing sex disparity in the risk of CV hospitalization.

Behind the Counter: Exploring Pharmacists' Stressors and Lessons Learned During the Pandemic in Ontario, Canada.

Background: The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to increased stress among healthcare professionals. Among these healthcare providers are Ontario pharmacists, who are facing new and pre-existing challenges and new stressors since the pandemic. Objectives: This study aimed to understand the stressors and lessons learned by Ontario pharmacists during the pandemic through their lived experiences. Methods: In this descriptive qualitative study, we conducted semi-structured one-on-one interviews with Ontario pharmacists virtually to learn about their stressors and lessons learned during the pandemic. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, then analyzed using thematic analysis. Findings: We reached data saturation after 15 interviews and identified 5 main themes: (1) Communication/miscommunication with the public and other care providers; (2) high workload due to staff shortage and low appreciation/acknowledgement; (3) mismatch in market demand and supply; (4) informational gaps pertaining to the COVID-19 pandemic along with rapid protocol changes; and (5) lessons learned to improve the future of pharmacy practice in Ontario. Discussion: Our study helped us gain a better understanding of the stressors pharmacists faced, their contributions, and the opportunities that arose due to the pandemic. Conclusion: Drawing on these experiences, this study provides recommendations to improve pharmacy practice and increase preparedness for future emergencies.

National trends in prescription drug expenditures and projections for 2023.

PURPOSE: To report historical patterns of pharmaceutical expenditures, to identify factors that may influence future spending, and to predict growth in drug spending in 2023 in the United States, with a focus on the nonfederal hospital and clinic sectors. METHODS: Historical patterns were assessed by examining data on drug purchases from manufacturers using the IQVIA National Sales Perspectives database. Factors that may influence drug spending in hospitals and clinics in 2023 were reviewed, including new drug approvals, patent expirations, and potential new policies or legislation. Focused analyses were conducted for biosimilars, cancer drugs, diabetes medications, generics, COVID-19 pandemic influence, and specialty drugs. For nonfederal hospitals, clinics, and overall (all sectors), estimates of growth of pharmaceutical expenditures in 2023 were based on a combination of quantitative analyses and expert opinion. RESULTS: In 2022, overall pharmaceutical expenditures in the US grew 9.4% compared to 2021, for a total of $633.5 billion. Utilization (a 5.9% increase), price (a 1.7% increase) and new drugs (a 1.8% increase) drove this increase. Adalimumab was the top-selling drug in 2022, followed by semaglutide and apixaban. Drug expenditures were $37.2 billion (a 5.9% decrease) and $116.9 billion (a 10.4% increase) in nonfederal hospitals and clinics, respectively. In clinics, new products and increased utilization growth drove growth, with a small impact from price changes. In nonfederal hospitals, a drop in utilization led to a decrease in expenditures, with price changes and new drugs contributing to growth in spending. Several new drugs that will influence spending have been or are expected to be approved in 2023. Specialty and cancer drugs will continue to drive expenditures along with the evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: For 2023, we expect overall prescription drug spending to rise by 6.0% to 8.0%, whereas in clinics and hospitals we anticipate increases of 8.0% to 10.0% and 1.0% to 3.0%, respectively, compared to 2022. These national estimates of future pharmaceutical expenditure growth may not be representative of any particular health system because of the myriad of local factors that influence actual spending.

Virtual care use prior to emergency department admissions during a stable COVID-19 period in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: The increased use of telemedicine to provide virtual outpatient visits during the pandemic has led to concerns about potential increased emergency department (ED) admissions and outpatient service use prior to such admissions. We examined the frequency of virtual visits use prior to ED admissions and characterized the patients with prior virtual visit use and the physicians who provided these outpatient visits. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, population-based, cross-sectional analysis using linked health administrative data in Ontario, Canada to identify patients who had an ED admission between July 1 and September 30, 2021 and patients with an ED admissions during the same period in 2019. We grouped patients based on their use of outpatient services in the 7 days prior to admission and reported their sociodemographic characteristics and healthcare utilization. RESULTS: There were 1,080,334 ED admissions in 2021 vs. 1,113,230 in 2019. In 2021, 74% of these admissions had no prior outpatient visits (virtual or in-person) within 7 days of admission, compared to 75% in 2019. Only 3% of ED admissions had both virtual and in-person visits in the 7 days prior to ED admission. Patients with prior virtual care use were more likely to be hospitalized than those without any outpatient care (13% vs 7.7.%). INTERPRETATION: The net amount of ED admissions and outpatient care prior to admission remained the same over a period of the COVID-19 pandemic when cases were relatively stable. Virtual care seemed to be able to appropriately triage patients to the ED and virtual visits replaced in-person visits ahead of ED admissions, as opposed to being additive.

Pharmacists' Mental Health during the First Two Years of the Pandemic: A Socio-Ecological Scoping Review.

Healthcare workers have been under a great deal of stress and have been experiencing burnout throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Among these, healthcare workers are pharmacists who have been instrumental in the fight against the pandemic. This scoping review examined the impact of the pandemic on pharmacists' mental health and their antecedents using three databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO). Eligible studies included primary research articles that examined the mental health antecedents and outcomes among pharmacists during the first two years of the pandemic. We used the Social Ecological Model to categorize antecedents per outcome. The initial search yielded 4165 articles, and 23 met the criteria. The scoping review identified pharmacists experiencing poor mental health during the pandemic, including anxiety, burnout, depression, and job stress. In addition, several individual, interpersonal, organizational, community, and policy-level antecedents were identified. As this review revealed a general decline in pharmacists' mental health during the pandemic, further research is required to understand the long-term impacts of the pandemic on pharmacists. Furthermore, we recommend practical mitigation strategies to improve pharmacists' mental health, such as implementing crisis/pandemic preparedness protocols and leadership training to foster a better workplace culture.

COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Against Omicron Infection and Hospitalization

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to provide real-world evidence on coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic infection and severe outcomes caused by Omicron in children aged 5 to 11 years. METHODS: We used the test-negative study design and linked provincial databases to estimate BNT162b2 vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection and severe outcomes caused by Omicron in children aged 5 to 11 years between January 2 and August 27, 2022 in Ontario. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate VE by time since the latest dose, compared with unvaccinated children, and we evaluated VE by dosing interval. RESULTS: We included 6284 test-positive cases and 8389 test-negative controls. VE against symptomatic infection declined from 24% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8% to 36%) 14 to 29 days after a first dose and 66% (95% CI, 60% to 71%) 7 to 29 days after 2 doses. VE was higher for children with dosing intervals of ≥56 days (57% [95% CI, 51% to 62%]) than 15 to 27 days (12% [95% CI, - 11% to 30%]) and 28 to 41 days (38% [95% CI, 28% to 47%]), but appeared to wane over time for all dosing interval groups. VE against severe outcomes was 94% (95% CI, 57% to 99%) 7 to 29 days after 2 doses and declined to 57% (95%CI, -20% to 85%) after ≥120 days. CONCLUSIONS: In children aged 5 to 11 years, 2 doses of BNT162b2 provide moderate protection against symptomatic Omicron infection within 4 months of vaccination and good protection against severe outcomes. Protection wanes more rapidly for infection than severe outcomes. Overall, longer dosing intervals confer higher protection against symptomatic infection, however protection decreases and becomes similar to shorter dosing interval starting 90 days after vaccination.

Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine booster doses against Omicron severe outcomes.

We estimated the effectiveness of booster doses of monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against Omicron-associated severe outcomes among adults in Ontario, Canada. We used a test-negative design to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) against hospitalization or death among SARS-CoV-2-tested adults aged ≥50 years from January 2 to October 1, 2022, stratified by age and time since vaccination. We also compared VE during BA.1/BA.2 and BA.4/BA.5 sublineage predominance. We included 11,160 cases and 62,880 tests for test-negative controls. Depending on the age group, compared to unvaccinated adults, VE was 91-98% 7-59 days after a third dose, waned to 76-87% after ≥240 days, was restored to 92-97% 7-59 days after a fourth dose, and waned to 86-89% after ≥120 days. VE was lower and declined faster during BA.4/BA.5 versus BA.1/BA.2 predominance, particularly after ≥120 days. Here we show that booster doses of monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines restored strong protection against severe outcomes for at least 3 months after vaccination. Across the entire study period, protection declined slightly over time, but waned more during BA.4/BA.5 predominance.

COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Against Omicron Infection and Hospitalization.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to provide real-world evidence on coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic infection and severe outcomes caused by Omicron in children aged 5 to 11 years. METHODS: We used the test-negative study design and linked provincial databases to estimate BNT162b2 vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection and severe outcomes caused by Omicron in children aged 5 to 11 years between January 2 and August 27, 2022 in Ontario. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate VE by time since the latest dose, compared with unvaccinated children, and we evaluated VE by dosing interval. RESULTS: We included 6284 test-positive cases and 8389 test-negative controls. VE against symptomatic infection declined from 24% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8% to 36%) 14 to 29 days after a first dose and 66% (95% CI, 60% to 71%) 7 to 29 days after 2 doses. VE was higher for children with dosing intervals of ≥56 days (57% [95% CI, 51% to 62%]) than 15 to 27 days (12% [95% CI, -11% to 30%]) and 28 to 41 days (38% [95% CI, 28% to 47%]), but appeared to wane over time for all dosing interval groups. VE against severe outcomes was 94% (95% CI, 57% to 99%) 7 to 29 days after 2 doses and declined to 57% (95%CI, -20% to 85%) after ≥120 days. CONCLUSIONS: In children aged 5 to 11 years, 2 doses of BNT162b2 provide moderate protection against symptomatic Omicron infection within 4 months of vaccination and good protection against severe outcomes. Protection wanes more rapidly for infection than severe outcomes. Overall, longer dosing intervals confer higher protection against symptomatic infection, however protection decreases and becomes similar to shorter dosing interval starting 90 days after vaccination.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against hospitalization and death in Canada: A multiprovincial test-negative design study.

BACKGROUND: A major goal of COVID-19 vaccination is to prevent severe outcomes (hospitalizations and deaths). We estimated the effectiveness of mRNA and ChAdOx1 COVID-19 vaccines against severe outcomes in four Canadian provinces between December 2020 and September 2021. METHODS: We conducted this multiprovincial retrospective test-negative study among community-dwelling adults aged ≥18 years in Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, and Manitoba using linked provincial databases and a common study protocol. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate province-specific vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization and/or death. Estimates were pooled using random effects models. RESULTS: We included 2,508,296 tested subjects, with 31,776 COVID-19 hospitalizations and 5,842 deaths. Vaccine effectiveness was 83% after a first dose, and 98% after a second dose, against both hospitalization and death (separately). Against severe outcomes (hospitalization or death), effectiveness was 87% (95%CI: 71%-94%) ≥84 days after a first dose of mRNA vaccine, increasing to 98% (95%CI: 96%-99%) ≥112 days after a second dose. Vaccine effectiveness against severe outcomes for ChAdOx1 was 88% (95%CI: 75%-94%) ≥56 days after a first dose, increasing to 97% (95%CI: 91%-99%) ≥56 days after a second dose. Lower one-dose effectiveness was observed for adults aged ≥80 years and those with comorbidities, but effectiveness became comparable after a second dose. Two doses of vaccines provided very high protection for both homologous and heterologous schedules, and against Alpha, Gamma, and Delta variants. CONCLUSIONS: Two doses of mRNA or ChAdOx1 vaccines provide excellent protection against severe outcomes of hospitalization and death.

Population-based evaluation of the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for reducing hospital admissions and mortality from COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: A randomized controlled trial involving a high-risk, unvaccinated population that was conducted before the Omicron variant emerged found that nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was effective in preventing progression to severe COVID-19. Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in preventing severe COVID-19 while Omicron and its subvariants predominate. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study in Ontario that included all residents who were older than 17 years of age and had a positive polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2 between Apr. 4 and Aug. 31, 2022. We compared patients treated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir with patients who were not treated and measured the primary outcome of hospital admission from COVID-19 or all-cause death at 1-30 days, and a secondary outcome of all-cause death. We used weighted logistic regression to calculate weighted odds ratios (ORs) with confidence intervals (CIs) using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to control for confounding. RESULTS: The final cohort included 177 545 patients, 8876 (5.0%) who were treated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and 168 669 (95.0%) who were not treated. The groups were well balanced with respect to demographic and clinical characteristics after applying stabilized IPTW. We found that the occurrence of hospital admission or death was lower in the group given nirmatrelvir-ritonavir than in those who were not (2.1% v. 3.7%; weighted OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.47-0.67). For death alone, the weighted OR was 0.49 (95% CI 0.39-0.62). Our findings were similar across strata of age, drug-drug interactions, vaccination status and comorbidities. The number needed to treat to prevent 1 case of severe COVID-19 was 62 (95% CI 43-80), which varied across strata. INTERPRETATION: Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was associated with significantly reduced odds of hospital admission and death from COVID-19, which supports use to treat patients with mild COVID-19 who are at risk for severe disease.

Characteristics and Health Care Use of Patients Attending Virtual Walk-in Clinics in Ontario, Canada: Cross-sectional Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Funding changes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic supported the growth of direct-to-consumer virtual walk-in clinics in several countries. Little is known about patients who attend virtual walk-in clinics or how these clinics contribute to care continuity and subsequent health care use. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to describe the characteristics and measure the health care use of patients who attended virtual walk-in clinics compared to the general population and a subset that received any virtual family physician visit. METHODS: This was a retrospective, cross-sectional study in Ontario, Canada. Patients who had received a family physician visit at 1 of 13 selected virtual walk-in clinics from April 1 to December 31, 2020, were compared to Ontario residents who had any virtual family physician visit. The main outcome was postvisit health care use. RESULTS: Virtual walk-in patients (n=132,168) had fewer comorbidities and lower previous health care use than Ontarians with any virtual family physician visit. Virtual walk-in patients were also less likely to have a subsequent in-person visit with the same physician (309/132,168, 0.2% vs 704,759/6,412,304, 11%; standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.48), more likely to have a subsequent virtual visit (40,030/132,168, 30.3% vs 1,403,778/6,412,304, 21.9%; SMD 0.19), and twice as likely to have an emergency department visit within 30 days (11,003/132,168, 8.3% vs 262,509/6,412,304, 4.1%; SMD 0.18), an effect that persisted after adjustment and across urban/rural resident groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to Ontarians attending any family physician virtual visit, virtual walk-in patients were less likely to have a subsequent in-person physician visit and were more likely to visit the emergency department. These findings will inform policy makers aiming to ensure the integration of virtual visits with longitudinal primary care.

Maternal mRNA covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy and delta or omicron infection or hospital admission in infants: test negative design study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effectiveness of maternal mRNA covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy against delta and omicron severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and hospital admission in infants. DESIGN: Test negative design study. SETTING: Community and hospital testing in Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Infants younger than six months of age, born between 7 May 2021 and 31 March 2022, who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 between 7 May 2021 and 5 September 2022. INTERVENTION: Maternal mRNA covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Laboratory confirmed delta or omicron infection or hospital admission of the infant. Multivariable logistic regression estimated vaccine effectiveness, with adjustments for clinical and sociodemographic characteristics associated with vaccination and infection. RESULTS: 8809 infants met eligibility criteria, including 99 delta cases (4365 controls) and 1501 omicron cases (4847 controls). Infant vaccine effectiveness from two maternal doses was 95% (95% confidence interval 88% to 98%) against delta infection and 97% (73% to 100%) against infant hospital admission due to delta and 45% (37% to 53%) against omicron infection and 53% (39% to 64%) against hospital admission due to omicron. Vaccine effectiveness for three doses was 73% (61% to 80%) against omicron infection and 80% (64% to 89%) against hospital admission due to omicron. Vaccine effectiveness for two doses against infant omicron infection was highest with the second dose in the third trimester (53% (42% to 62%)) compared with the first (47% (31% to 59%)) or second (37% (24% to 47%)) trimesters. Vaccine effectiveness for two doses against infant omicron infection decreased from 57% (44% to 66%) between birth and eight weeks to 40% (21% to 54%) after 16 weeks of age. CONCLUSIONS: Maternal covid-19 vaccination with a second dose during pregnancy was highly effective against delta and moderately effective against omicron infection and hospital admission in infants during the first six months of life. A third vaccine dose bolstered protection against omicron. Effectiveness for two doses was highest with maternal vaccination in the third trimester, and effectiveness decreased in infants beyond eight weeks of age.

COVID-19 pandemic and trends in new diagnosis of atrial fibrillation: A nationwide analysis of claims data.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with a five-fold increased risk of stroke and a two-fold increased risk of death. We aimed to quantify changes in new diagnoses of AF following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Investigating changes in new diagnoses of AF is of relevance because delayed diagnosis interferes with timely treatment to prevent stroke, heart failure, and death. METHODS: Using De-identified Optum's Clinformatics® Data Mart, we identified 19,500,401 beneficiaries continuously enrolled for 12 months in 2016-Q3 2020 with no history of AF. The primary outcome was new AF diagnoses per 30-day interval. Secondary outcomes included AF diagnosis in the inpatient setting, AF diagnosis in the outpatient setting, and ischemic stroke as initial manifestation of AF. We constructed seasonal autoregressive integrated moving average models to quantify changes in new AF diagnoses after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (3/11/2020, date of pandemic declaration). We tested whether changes in the new AF diagnoses differed by race and ethnicity. RESULTS: The average age of study participants was 51.0±18.5 years, and 52% of the sample was female. During the study period, 2.7% of the study sample had newly-diagnosed AF. New AF diagnoses decreased by 35% (95% CI, 21%-48%) after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, from 1.14 per 1000 individuals (95% CI, 1.05-1.24) to 0.74 per 1000 (95% CI, 0.64 to 0.83, p-value<0.001). New AF diagnoses decreased by 37% (95% CI, 13%- 55%) in the outpatient setting and by 29% (95% CI, 14%-43%) in the inpatient setting. The decrease in new AF diagnoses was similar across racial and ethnic subgroups. CONCLUSION: In a nationwide cohort of 19.5 million individuals, new diagnoses of AF decreased substantially following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings evidence pandemic disruptions in access to care for AF, which are concerning because delayed diagnosis interferes with timely treatment to prevent complications.

The Use of Telemedicine in Older-Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic: a Weekly Cross-Sectional Analysis in Ontario, Canada.

The COVID-19 pandemic led to rapid adoption of telemedicine for health-care service delivery. There are concerns that older adults, the highest users of the health-care system, would be left behind because of this shift. It remains unclear how the pandemic impacted telemedicine and other health-care service use in this group. We conducted a population-based, weekly cross-sectional study using administrative data from Ontario, Canada. Telemedicine use was measured for the overall older-adult population aged 65+ and across sociodemographic groups from January 2018 to March 2021. We also assessed the use of key health-care services between high and low patient users of telemedicine who were diagnosed with dementia. We found that telemedicine visits outnumbered in-person visits in older adults during the pandemic (average of 74 vs. 62 visits per 1000 per week). Of all specialties, psychiatrists delivered the most telemedicine visits, reaching 90% of visits in a week. Higher rates of telemedicine use during COVID-19 were found for patients who resided in urban regions (84 visits per 1000 per week), but no differences were found across income quintiles. Among dementia patients, high telemedicine users had higher health-care utilization than low telemedicine users (i.e., 21,108 vs. 3,276 outpatient visits per week) during the pandemic. Findings suggest that telemedicine was crucial in helping older adults, a group most vulnerable to COVID-19, maintain access to care during the pandemic. Telemedicine presents an important opportunity for older adults; however, future research should focus on barriers to equitable access and quality of care provided through telemedicine.

Comparison of Healthcare Utilization Between Telemedicine and Standard Care: A Propensity-Score Matched Cohort Study Among Individuals With Chronic Psychotic Disorders in Ontario, Canada.

Background: Telemedicine adoption has grown significantly due to the coronavirus of 2019 pandemic; however, it remains unclear what the impact of widespread telemedicine use is on healthcare utilization among individuals with psychosis. Objectives: To investigate the impact of telemedicine use on changes in healthcare utilization among patients with chronic psychotic disorders (CPDs). Study Design: We conducted a population-based, retrospective propensity-matched cohort study using healthcare administrative data in Ontario, Canada. Patients were included if they had at least one ambulatory visit between March 14, 2020 and September 30, 2020 and a CPD diagnosis any time before March 14, 2020. Telemedicine users (2+ virtual visits after March 14, 2020) were propensity score-matched 1:1 with standard care users (minimum of 1 in-person or virtual ambulatory visit and maximum of 1 virtual visit after March 14, 2020) based on several baseline characteristics. Monthly use of various healthcare services was compared between the two groups from 12 months before to 3 months after their index in-person or virtual ambulatory visit after March 14, 2020 using generalized estimating equations (eg, hospitalizations, emergency department [ED] visits, and outpatient physician visits). The slope of change over the study period (ie, rate ratio) as well as a ratio of slopes, were calculated for both telemedicine and standard care groups for each outcome. Study Results: A total of 18 333 pairs of telemedicine and standard care patients were identified after matching (60.8% male, mean [SD] age 45.4 [16.3] years). There was a significantly greater decline across time in the telemedicine group compared to the standard care group for ED visits due to any psychiatric conditions (ratio of slopes for telemedicine vs standard care (95% CI), 0.98 (0.98 to 0.99)). However, declines in primary care visit rates (ratio of slopes for telemedicine vs standard care (1.01 (1.01 to 1.02)), mental health outpatient visits with primary care (1.03 (1.03 to 1.04)), and all-cause outpatient visits with primary care (1.01 (1.01 to 1.02)), were steeper among the standard care group than telemedicine group. Conclusions: Overall, patients with CPDs appeared to benefit from telemedicine as evidenced by increased outpatient healthcare utilization and reductions in ED visits due to psychiatric conditions. This suggests that telemedicine may have allowed this patient group to have better access and continuity of care during the initial waves of the pandemic.

Outpatient purchasing patterns of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin in the USA and Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic: an interrupted time series analysis from 2016 to 2021.

BACKGROUND: Hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin received widespread attention after initial studies suggested that they were effective against COVID-19. However, several of these studies were later discredited. OBJECTIVES: We explored the impact of scientific articles, public announcements and social media posts on hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin purchases in the USA and Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, population-based time series analysis of retail hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin purchases in the USA and Canada from February 2016 through to December 2021, using IQVIA's Multinational Integrated Data Analysis database. We fitted the purchasing rates with interventional autoregressive integrated moving average models. We used Google Trends to identify the most influential interventions to include in the models. RESULTS: There were significant pulse increases in hydroxychloroquine purchases in March 2020 in both the USA (P < 0.0001) and Canada (P < 0.0001). For ivermectin, there were no significant changes in April 2020 in either the USA (P = 0.41) or Canada (P = 0.16); however, significant pulse increases occurred from December 2020 to January 2021 in both the USA (P = 0.0006) and Canada (P < 0.0001), as well as significant ramp increases from April to August 2021 in both the USA (P < 0.0001) and Canada (P = 0.02). The increases in ivermectin purchases were larger in the USA than in Canada. CONCLUSIONS: Increases in hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin purchasing rates aligned with controversial scientific articles and social media posts. This highlights the importance of scientific integrity and disseminating accurate epidemiologic information during pandemics.

COVID-19 and adherence to biologic therapies for psoriasis: An analysis of nationwide pharmacy claims data.

BACKGROUND: Early after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, concerns were raised that the use of psoriasis treatments, particularly biologic therapies because of their immunosuppressant effects, could be associated with a poor prognosis in the case of COVID-19 infection. OBJECTIVE: To examine changes in adherence to systematic biologic therapies for psoriasis after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Using IQVIA medical and pharmacy claims data from January 1, 2018, to October 31, 2020, we identified patients aged 18 years or older who had a diagnosis of plaque psoriasis in 2018 and who received systemic biologic therapies for psoriasis, including both provider-administered and pharmacy-dispensed therapies. We calculated the incidence of 14-day gaps without therapy per 1,000 study participants for each 30-day interval. We constructed interrupted time series analyses to test changes in the incidence of outcomes after the pandemic declaration. RESULTS: The sample included 15,890 study participants: 45.4% were female and 15.2% were aged 65 years or older. For patients using biologic therapies dispensed from the pharmacy, there was a 13.1% decrease in the incidence of 14-day gaps without biologic therapy immediately after pandemic declaration, from 92.4 gaps per 1,000 patients to 80.2 gaps per 1,000 patients, but this decrease was not statistically significant. However, for patients using provider-administered therapies, the incidence of 14-day gaps without biologic therapy increased by 55.1% after pandemic declaration, from 29.0 gaps per 1,000 patients to 44.9 gaps per 1,000 patients (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, we found an increased incidence of gaps in biologic therapy for psoriasis among users of provider-administered treatments but not among users of pharmacy-dispensed therapies. DISCLOSURES: Dr Hernandez reports personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb and personal fees from Pfizer outside the submitted work. Dr Hernandez is funded by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (grant K01HL142847). The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication. The statements, findings, conclusions, views, and opinions expressed in this publication are based on data obtained under license from IQVIA as part of the IQVIA Institute's Human Data Science Research Collaborative.

Risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection following initial COVID-19 vaccination: Population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Anecdotally there are reports of newly diagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infection shortly after vaccination. This has led some to speculate that vaccination itself might inadvertently increase the short-term risk of COVID potentially due to airborne spread at mass vaccination clinics or relaxation of precautions following vaccination. We explored whether receipt of vaccination was associated with a short-term increase in the risk of being diagnosed with COVID-19 and if differences exist between vaccination settings. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study in Ontario, Canada to compare the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection within 21 days of receiving a first vaccination, according to the setting in which vaccines were administered between March 1, 2021 and May 6, 2021. We used linked population-wide vaccination, laboratory testing, and health administrative databases. We created a 1:1 matched comparison group of unexposed individuals. We reported the overall risk of infection calculated at 3, 7, 10, 14, 18, and 21 days. This was completed overall and by setting of vaccine receipt. RESULTS: We identified 4,798,430 Ontario residents who received their first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. In the primary analysis, the rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection was significantly lower among vaccine recipients vs non-recipients at all the post-vaccination time points. Analysis stratified by vaccination setting found that mass vaccination clinics, pharmacies, and physician offices were consistent with the main findings. Individuals who received their first vaccine dose in congregate residential settings had a higher rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection at 7 days (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.00-1.83) and 10 days (HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.03-2.15). CONCLUSION: In this population-based cohort study, we found that there was no increased risk of SARS-CoV2 infection after vaccination suggesting no broad transmission of disease at time of vaccination. Some evidence of increased risk among those vaccinated in congregate settings, highlighting the need to consider opportunities for supporting safe vaccine administration in these settings. Given ongoing and future immunization programs, the results support the need for continued vigilance during any mass vaccination processes and education regarding the delayed nature of protection following vaccination.

Impact of the COVID-19 Controlled Drugs and Substances Act exemption on pharmacist prescribing of opioids, benzodiazepines and stimulants in Ontario: A cross-sectional time-series analysis.

Background: Due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, Health Canada issued an exemption to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA) on March 19, 2020, enabling pharmacists to act as prescribers of controlled substances to support continuity of care. Our study investigates utilization of the CDSA exemption by Ontario pharmacists with the intent to inform policy on pharmacist scope of practice and to improve future patient outcomes. Methods: We conducted a time-series analysis of pharmacist-prescribed opioid, benzodiazepine and stimulant claims data using Ontario Narcotics Monitoring System (NMS) data between January 2019 and December 2021. We used ARIMA modelling to measure the change to these classes of claims and to opioid claims containing quantities greater than a 30-day supply. Results: Postexemption, the average weekly number of pharmacist-prescribed opioid, benzodiazepine and stimulant claims rose by 146% (160 to 393 claims/week), 960% (49 to 515 claims/week) and 2150% (8 to 177 claims/week), respectively. There was a 2-week lag period between the time of announcement and the statistically significant increase in claims on April 5, 2020(p < 0.0001). The total number of claims for opioid quantities exceeding a 30-day supply decreased by 60%. Cumulative pharmacist-prescribed claims accounted for under 2% of the total NMS claims. Interpretation: Ontario pharmacists used the CDSA exemption but were prescribing at low rates. These findings suggest an effective change to pharmacy practice as the low rates show pharmacists used the exemption as a last line of defense. This may lead to further studies exploring treatment breaks during the COVID-19 pandemic and future changes to pharmacist scope to benefit patients.