Serum creatinine to absolute lymphocyte count ratio effectively risk stratifies patients who require intensive care in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019.

Patients with preexisting kidney disease or acute kidney injury had poorer outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) illness. Lymphopenia was associated with more severe illness. Risk stratification with simple laboratory tests may help appropriate site patients in a cost-effective manner and ease the burden on healthcare systems. We examined a ratio of serum creatinine level to absolute lymphocyte count at presentation (creatinine-lymphocyte ratio, CLR) in predicting outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We analyzed 553 consecutive polymerase chain reaction-positive SARS-COV-2 hospitalized patients. Patients with end-stage kidney disease were excluded. Serum creatinine and full blood count (FBC) examination were obtained within the first day of admission. We examined the utility of CLR in predicting adverse clinical outcomes (requiring intensive care, mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy or death). An optimized cutoff of CLR > 77 was derived for predicting adverse outcomes (72.2% sensitivity, and 83.9% specificity). Ninety-seven patients (17.5%) fell within this cut off. These patients were older and more likely to have chronic medical conditions. A higher proportion of these patients had adverse outcomes (13.4% vs 1.1%, P < .001). On receiver operating curve analyses, CLR predicted patients who had adverse outcomes well (area under curve [AUC] = 0.82, 95%CI 0.72-0.92), which was comparable to other laboratory tests like serum ferritin, C-reactive protein and lactate dehydrogenase. Elevated CLR on admission, which may be determined by relatively simple laboratory tests, was able to reasonably discriminate patients who had experienced adverse outcomes during their hospital stay. This may be a simple and cost-effective means of risk stratification and triage.

External validation of the PRIORITY model in predicting COVID-19 critical illness in vaccinated and unvaccinated patients.

OBJECTIVES: Predictive scores are important tools for the triage of patients with coronavirus disease 2019. The PRIORITY score is advantageous because it does not require laboratory and radiologic information. However, the original development and validation cohorts studied only unvaccinated patients in early 2020. We aimed to externally validate the PRIORITY score in a cohort of patients with the novel delta and omicron variants of coronavirus disease 2019 and mixed vaccination status. METHODS: A total of 410 patients were included in a cross-sectional sampling of all patients admitted to the National Centre of Infectious Diseases on October 27, 2021. A further 102 and 136 patients with vaccine-breakthrough Delta and Omicron variant infection from April to August and December 2021, respectively, were also included. Variables at the time of admission were collected retrospectively from medical records and used to calculate the probability of deterioration using the PRIORITY model. RESULTS: Of the total 648 included patients, 447 (69.0%) were vaccinated. The mean age was 61.6 years (standard deviation ± 19.0 years), and 268 patients (41.4%) were female. A total of 112 patients (17.3%) met the primary outcome of developing critical illness or mortality. The performance of the score in this cohort was comparable with the original cohorts, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for all patients of 0.794 (95% CI, 0.752-0.835; p < 0.001), regression coefficient of 1.069, and intercept of 0.04. Subgroup analysis of unvaccinated and vaccinated patients showed that performance was superior in vaccinated individuals, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.684 (95% CI, 0.608-0.760; p < 0.0001) and 0.831 (95% CI, 0.772-0.891; p < 0.0001), respectively. DISCUSSION: Our data support the continued use of the PRIORITY score in this era of novel variants and increased vaccination uptake.

Haematological profile of COVID-19 patients from a centre in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: Haematological markers such as absolute lymphopenia have been associated with severe COVID-19 infection. However, in the literature to date, the cohorts described have typically included patients who were moderate to severely unwell with pneumonia and who required intensive care stay. It is uncertain if these markers apply to a population with less severe illness. We sought to describe the haematological profile of patients with mild disease with COVID-19 admitted to a single centre in Singapore. METHODS: We examined 554 consecutive PCR positive SARS-COV-2 patients admitted to a single tertiary healthcare institution from Feb 2020 to April 2020. In all patients a full blood count was obtained within 24 h of presentation. RESULTS: Patients with pneumonia had higher neutrophil percentages (66.5 ± 11.6 vs 55.2 ± 12.6%, p < 0.001), lower absolute lymphocyte count (1.5 ± 1.1 vs 1.9 ± 2.1 x109/L, p < 0.011) and absolute eosinophil count (0.2 ± 0.9 vs 0.7 ± 1.8 × 109/L, p = 0.002). Platelet counts (210 ± 56 vs 230 ± 61, p = 0.020) were slightly lower in the group with pneumonia. We did not demonstrate significant differences in the neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, monocyte-lymphocyte ratio and platelet-lymphocyte ratio in patients with or without pneumonia. Sixty-eight patients (12.3%) had peripheral eosinophilia. This was more common in migrant workers living in dormitories. CONCLUSION: Neutrophilia and lymphopenia were found to be markers associated with severe COVID-19 illness. We did not find that combined haematological parameters: neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, monocyte-lymphocyte ratio and platelet-lymphocyte ratio, had any association with disease severity in our cohort of patients with mild-moderate disease. Migrant workers living in dormitories had eosinophilia which may reflect concurrent chronic parasitic infection.

Utility of conventional clinical risk scores in a low-risk COVID-19 cohort.

BACKGROUND: Several specific risk scores for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) involving clinical and biochemical parameters have been developed from higher-risk patients, in addition to validating well-established pneumonia risk scores. We compared multiple risk scores in predicting more severe disease in a cohort of young patients with few comorbid illnesses. Accurately predicting the progression of COVID-19 may guide triage and therapy. METHODS: We retrospectively examined 554 hospitalised COVID-19 patients in Singapore. The CURB-65 score, Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI), ISARIC 4C prognostic score (4C), CHA2DS2-VASc score, COVID-GRAM Critical Illness risk score (COVID-GRAM), Veterans Health Administration COVID-19 index for COVID-19 Mortality (VACO), and the "rule-of-6" score were compared for three performance characteristics: the need for supplemental oxygen, intensive care admission and mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: A majority of patients were young (≤ 40 years, n = 372, 67.1%). 57 (10.3%) developed pneumonia, with 16 (2.9% of study population) requiring supplemental oxygen. 19 patients (3.4%) required intensive care and 2 patients (0.5%) died. The clinical risk scores predicted patients who required supplemental oxygenation and intensive care well. Adding the presence of fever to the CHA2DS2-VASc score and 4C score improved the ability to predict patients who required supplemental oxygen (c-statistic 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.94; and 0.84, 95% CI 0.75-0.94 respectively). CONCLUSION: Simple scores including well established pneumonia risk scores can help predict progression of COVID-19. Adding the presence of fever as a parameter to the CHA2DS2-VASc or the 4C score improved the performance of these scores in a young population with few comorbidities.

Elevated liver enzymes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Singapore.

ABSTRACT: Liver dysfunction in patients with COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) has been described. However, it is not clear if the presence of abnormal liver function tests at presentation was related to underlying undiagnosed liver disease, or a result of the viral infection.We retrospectively examined the first 554 consecutive polymerase chain reaction positive SARS-CoV-2 patients admitted from February 2020 to April 2020 to our academic medical centre. We reviewed their clinical data, chest radiography and laboratory studies obtained within 24 hour of admission.Despite similar hemodynamic parameters, we found significant aspartate transaminase elevation (64 ±â€Š141 vs 35 ±â€Š23 U/L, P < .001) in those with pneumonia compared to those without. Elevated liver enzymes were seen in 102 patients (18.4%). They presented with higher temperatures (38.5 ±â€Š0.9 vs 37.5 ±â€Š0.8 degC, P = .011), higher total white cell counts (6.95 ±â€Š2.29 vs 6.39 ±â€Š2.19 x109/L, P = .021), serum ferritin (240 ±â€Š274 vs 165 ±â€Š198 ng/ml, P = .002) and lactate dehydrogenase (632 ±â€Š912 vs 389 ±â€Š107 U/L, P < .001). These patients were more likely to require intensive care (6.9% vs 2.7% P = .036) and mechanical ventilation (5.9% vs 2.2%, P = .046). Migrant workers from dormitories had a higher rate of baseline liver function test abnormalities (88/425 vs 14/129, P = .01), which were more likely to persist at the time of discharge.Despite relatively mild COVID-19 disease, there was a significant prevalence of liver dysfunction, particularly amongst migrant workers. Elevated liver enzymes were associated with more severe disease, despite similar haemodynamic characteristics. Future studies should explore whether pre-existing liver disease may predispose to more severe COVID-19 disease.

Airborne SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in hospital environment using high-flowrate air samplers and its comparison to surface sampling

Abstract Reliable methods to detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2 at venues where people gather are essential for epidemiological surveillance to guide public policy. Communal screening of air in a highly crowded space has the potential to provide early warning on the presence and potential transmission of SARS-CoV-2 as suggested by studies early in the epidemic. As hospitals and public facilities apply varying degrees of restrictions and regulations, it is important to provide multiple methodological options to enable environmental SARS-CoV-2 surveillance under different conditions. This study assessed the feasibility of using high-flowrate air samplers combined with RNA extraction kit designed for environmental sample to perform airborne SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in hospital setting, tested by RT-qPCR. The success rate of the air samples in detecting SARS-CoV-2 was then compared with surface swab samples collected in the same proximity. Additionally, positive RT-qPCR samples underwent viral culture to assess the viability of the sampled SARS-CoV-2. The study was performed in inpatient ward environments of a quaternary care university teaching hospital in Singapore housing active COVID-19 patients within the period of February to May 2020. Two types of wards were tested, naturally ventilated open-cohort ward and mechanically ventilated isolation ward. Distances between the site of air sampling and the patient cluster in the investigated wards were also recorded. No successful detection of airborne SARS-CoV-2 was recorded when 50 L/min air samplers were used. Upon increasing the sampling flowrate to 150 L/min, our results showed a high success rate in detecting the presence of SARS-CoV-2 from the air samples (72%) compared to the surface swab samples (9.6%). The positive detection rate of the air samples along with the corresponding viral load could be associated with the distance between sampling site and patient. The furthest distance from patient with PCR-positive air samples was 5.5 m. The airborne SARS-CoV-2 detection was comparable between the two types of wards with 60%?87.5% success rate. High prevalence of the virus was found in toilet areas, both on surfaces and in air. Finally, no successful culture attempt was recorded from the environmental air or surface samples.

Range of Varicella Zoster Co-Infections with COVID-19, Singapore.

There have been recent descriptions of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presenting as 'varicella-like exanthem'. We report three cases of patients with Varicella-Zoster Virus (VZV) and COVID-19 co-infections, presenting in three varied ways. These cases highlight the need for heightened alertness to how such co-infections can present, to pick up overlapping 'dual pathologies' during this current pandemic given that infection control measures including airborne precautions are crucial for both COVID-19 and VZV.

A blood RNA transcriptome signature for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a respiratory viral infection with unique features including a more chronic course and systemic disease manifestations including multiple organ involvement; and there are differences in disease severity between ethnic groups. The immunological basis for disease has not been fully characterised. Analysis of whole-blood RNA expression may provide valuable information on disease pathogenesis. METHODS: We studied 45 patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection within 10 days from onset of illness and a control group of 19 asymptomatic healthy volunteers with no known exposure to COVID-19 in the previous 14 days. Relevant demographic and clinical information was collected and a blood sample was drawn from all participants for whole-blood RNA sequencing. We evaluated differentially-expressed genes in COVID-19 patients (log2 fold change ≥ 1 versus healthy controls; false-discovery rate < 0.05) and associated protein pathways and compared these to published whole-blood signatures for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and influenza. We developed a disease score reflecting the overall magnitude of expression of internally-validated genes and assessed the relationship between the disease score and clinical disease parameters. RESULTS: We found 135 differentially-expressed genes in the patients with COVID-19 (median age 35 years; 82% male; 36% Chinese, 53% South Asian ethnicity). Of the 117 induced genes, 14 were found in datasets from RSV and 40 from influenza; 95 genes were unique to COVID-19. Protein pathways were mostly generic responses to viral infections, including apoptosis by P53-associated pathway, but also included some unique pathways such as viral carcinogenesis. There were no major qualitative differences in pathways between ethnic groups. The composite gene-expression score was correlated with the time from onset of symptoms and nasal swab qPCR CT values (both p < 0.01) but was not related to participant age, gender, ethnicity or the presence or absence of chest X-ray abnormalities (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The whole-blood transcriptome of COVID-19 has overall similarity with other respiratory infections but there are some unique pathways that merit further exploration to determine clinical relevance. The approach to a disease score may be of value, but needs further validation in a population with a greater range of disease severity.

Demographic shift in COVID-19 patients in Singapore from an aged, at-risk population to young migrant workers with reduced risk of severe disease.

OBJECTIVES: The vast majority of COVID-19 cases in Singapore have occurred amongst migrant workers. This paper examined trends in the hospitalised cases and tested the assumption that the low severity of disease was related to the relatively young affected population. METHODS: All patients with PCR-positive SARS-CoV-2 admitted from February to April 2020 were divided into: (i) imported cases, (ii) locally-transmitted cases outside migrant worker dormitories and (iii) migrant worker dormitory cases. They were examined for underlying comorbidities, clinical progress and outcomes. RESULTS: Imported cases (n = 29) peaked in mid-March 2020, followed by local cases (n = 100) in mid-April 2020; migrant worker cases (n = 425) continued to increase in late April 2020. Migrant worker cases were younger, had few medical comorbidities and less severe disease. As the migrant worker cases increased, the proportion of patients with pneumonia decreased, whilst patients presenting earlier in their illness and asymptomatic disease became more common. CONCLUSION: Singapore experienced a substantial shift in the population at risk of severe COVID-19. Successful control in the community protected an aging population. Large migrant worker dormitory outbreaks occurred, but the disease incurred was less severe, resulting in Singapore having one of the lowest case fatality rates in the world.

Asian-Pacific perspective on the psychological well-being of healthcare workers during the evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to significant strain on front-line healthcare workers. AIMS: In this multicentre study, we compared the psychological outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in various countries in the Asia-Pacific region and identified factors associated with adverse psychological outcomes. METHOD: From 29 April to 4 June 2020, the study recruited healthcare workers from major healthcare institutions in five countries in the Asia-Pacific region. A self-administrated survey that collected information on prior medical conditions, presence of symptoms, and scores on the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales and the Impact of Events Scale-Revised were used. The prevalence of depression, anxiety, stress and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) relating to COVID-19 was compared, and multivariable logistic regression identified independent factors associated with adverse psychological outcomes within each country. RESULTS: A total of 1146 participants from India, Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia and Vietnam were studied. Despite having the lowest volume of cases, Vietnam displayed the highest prevalence of PTSD. In contrast, Singapore reported the highest case volume, but had a lower prevalence of depression and anxiety. In the multivariable analysis, we found that non-medically trained personnel, the presence of physical symptoms and presence of prior medical conditions were independent predictors across the participating countries. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights that the varied prevalence of psychological adversity among healthcare workers is independent of the burden of COVID-19 cases within each country. Early psychological interventions may be beneficial for the vulnerable groups of healthcare workers with presence of physical symptoms, prior medical conditions and those who are not medically trained.

Four Patients with COVID-19 and Tuberculosis, Singapore, April-May 2020.

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and tuberculosis (TB) developed in 4 foreign workers living in dormitories in Singapore during April-May 2020. Clinical manifestations and atypical radiographic features of COVID-19 led to the diagnosis of TB through positive interferon-gamma release assay and culture results. During the COVID-19 pandemic, TB should not be overlooked.

Responding to COVID-19: how an academic infectious diseases division mobilized in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: On January 30, COVID-19 was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern-a week after Singapore's first imported case and 5 days before local transmission. The National University Hospital (NUH) is Singapore's third largest hospital with 1200 beds, heavy clinical workloads, and major roles in research and teaching. MAIN BODY: With memories of SARS still vivid, there was an urgent requirement for the NUH Division of Infectious Diseases to adapt-undergoing major reorganization to face rapidly changing priorities while ensuring usual essential services and standards. Leveraging on individual strengths, our division mobilized to meet the demands of COVID-19 while engaging in high-level coordination, strategy, and advocacy. We present our experience of the 60 days since the nation's first case. During this time, our hospital has managed 3030 suspect cases, including 1300 inpatients, 37 confirmed cases, and overseen 4384 samples tested for COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Complex hospital adaptations were supported by an unprecedented number of workflows and coordination channels essential to safe and effective operations. The actions we describe, aligned with international recommendations and emerging evidence-based best practices, may serve as a framework for other divisions and institutions facing the spread of COVID-19 globally.