Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 15 de 15
Filter
2.
BMJ ; 376: e068576, 2022 02 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1691357

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To create and validate a simple and transferable machine learning model from electronic health record data to accurately predict clinical deterioration in patients with covid-19 across institutions, through use of a novel paradigm for model development and code sharing. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: One US hospital during 2015-21 was used for model training and internal validation. External validation was conducted on patients admitted to hospital with covid-19 at 12 other US medical centers during 2020-21. PARTICIPANTS: 33 119 adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with respiratory distress or covid-19. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: An ensemble of linear models was trained on the development cohort to predict a composite outcome of clinical deterioration within the first five days of hospital admission, defined as in-hospital mortality or any of three treatments indicating severe illness: mechanical ventilation, heated high flow nasal cannula, or intravenous vasopressors. The model was based on nine clinical and personal characteristic variables selected from 2686 variables available in the electronic health record. Internal and external validation performance was measured using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and the expected calibration error-the difference between predicted risk and actual risk. Potential bed day savings were estimated by calculating how many bed days hospitals could save per patient if low risk patients identified by the model were discharged early. RESULTS: 9291 covid-19 related hospital admissions at 13 medical centers were used for model validation, of which 1510 (16.3%) were related to the primary outcome. When the model was applied to the internal validation cohort, it achieved an AUROC of 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.77 to 0.84) and an expected calibration error of 0.01 (95% confidence interval 0.00 to 0.02). Performance was consistent when validated in the 12 external medical centers (AUROC range 0.77-0.84), across subgroups of sex, age, race, and ethnicity (AUROC range 0.78-0.84), and across quarters (AUROC range 0.73-0.83). Using the model to triage low risk patients could potentially save up to 7.8 bed days per patient resulting from early discharge. CONCLUSION: A model to predict clinical deterioration was developed rapidly in response to the covid-19 pandemic at a single hospital, was applied externally without the sharing of data, and performed well across multiple medical centers, patient subgroups, and time periods, showing its potential as a tool for use in optimizing healthcare resources.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Clinical Decision Rules , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Machine Learning , Risk Assessment/methods , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Area Under Curve , Clinical Deterioration , Electronic Health Records , Female , Hospitals , Humans , Linear Models , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , ROC Curve , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
4.
Chest ; 161(4): 971-978, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1439285

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Pulse oximeters may produce less accurate results in non-White patients. RESEARCH QUESTION: Do pulse oximeters detect arterial hypoxemia less effectively in Black, Hispanic, and/or Asian patients than in White patients in respiratory failure and about to undergo extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO)? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Data on adult patients with respiratory failure readings 6 h before ECMO were provided by the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry. Data was collected from 324 centers between January 2019 and July 2020. Our primary analysis was of rates of occult hypoxemia-low arterial oxygen saturation (Sao2 ≤ 88%) on arterial blood gas measurement despite a pulse oximetry reading in the range of 92% to 96%. RESULTS: The rate of pre-ECMO occult hypoxemia, that is, arterial oxygen saturation (Sao2) ≤ 88%, was 10.2% (95% CI, 6.2%-15.3%) for 186 White patients with peripheral oxygen saturation (Spo2) of 92% to 96%; 21.5% (95% CI, 11.3%-35.3%) for 51 Black patients (P = .031 vs White); 8.6% (95% CI, 3.2%-17.7%) for 70 Hispanic patients (P = .693 vs White); and 9.2% (95% CI, 3.5%-19.0%) for 65 Asian patients (P = .820 vs White). Black patients with respiratory failure had a statistically significantly higher risk of occult hypoxemia with an OR of 2.57 (95% CI, 1.12-5.92) compared with White patients (P = .026). The risk of occult hypoxemia for Hispanic and Asian patients was equivalent to that of White patients. In a secondary analysis of patients with Sao2 ≤ 88% despite Spo2 > 96%, Black patients had more than three times the risk compared with White patients (OR, 3.52; 95% CI, 1.12-11.10; P = .032). INTERPRETATION: Compared with White patients, the prevalence of occult hypoxemia was higher in Black patients than in White patients about to undergo ECMO for respiratory failure, but it was comparable in Hispanic and Asian patients compared with White patients.


Subject(s)
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Racism , Respiratory Insufficiency , Adult , Humans , Hypoxia/diagnosis , Hypoxia/etiology , Oximetry/methods , Oxygen , Respiratory Insufficiency/diagnosis , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Retrospective Studies
5.
Epidemiology and Infection ; 149, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1364554

ABSTRACT

To investigate temporal trends in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related outcomes and to evaluate whether the impacts of potential risk factors and disparities changed over time, we conducted a retrospective cohort study with 249 075 patients tested or treated for COVID-19 at Michigan Medicine (MM), from 10 March 2020 to 3 May 2021. Among these patients, 26 289 were diagnosed with COVID-19. According to the calendar time in which they first tested positive, the COVID-19-positive cohort were stratified into three-time segments (T1: March–June, 2020;T2: July–December, 2020;T3: January–May, 2021). Potential risk factors that we examined included demographics, residential-level socioeconomic characteristics and preexisting comorbidities. The main outcomes included COVID-19-related hospitalisation and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. The hospitalisation rate for COVID-positive patients decreased from 36.2% in T1 to 14.2% in T3, and the ICU admission rate decreased from 16.9% to 2.9% from T1 to T3. These findings confirm that COVID-19-related hospitalisation and ICU admission rates were decreasing throughout the pandemic from March 2020 to May 2021. Black patients had significantly higher (compared to White patients) hospitalisation rates (19.6% vs. 11.0%) and ICU admission rates (6.3% vs. 2.8%) in the full COVID-19-positive cohort. A time-stratified analysis showed that racial disparities in hospitalisation rates persisted over time and the estimates of the odds ratios (ORs) stayed above unity in both unadjusted [full cohort: OR = 1.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.79, 2.19);T1: OR = 1.70, 95% CI (1.36, 2.12);T2: OR = 1.40, 95% CI (1.17, 1.68);T3: OR = 1.55, 95% CI (1.29, 1.86)] and adjusted analysis, accounting for differences in demographics, socioeconomic status, and preexisting comorbid conditions (full cohort: OR = 1.45, 95% CI (1.25, 1.68);T1: OR = 1.26, 95% CI (0.90, 1.76);T2: OR = 1.29, 95% CI (1.01, 1.64);T3: OR = 1.29, 95% CI (1.00, 1.67)).

6.
Chest ; 160(5): 1714-1728, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1248853

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in unprecedented adjustments to ICU organization and care processes globally. RESEARCH QUESTIONS: Did hospital emergency responses to the COVID-19 pandemic differ depending on hospital setting? Which strategies worked well to mitigate strain as perceived by intensivists? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Between August and November 2020, we carried out semistructured interviews of intensivists from tertiary and community hospitals across six regions in the United States that experienced early or large surges of COVID-19 patients, or both. We identified themes of hospital emergency responses using the four S framework of acute surge planning: space, staff, stuff, system. RESULTS: Thirty-three intensivists from seven tertiary and six community hospitals participated. Clinicians across both settings believed that canceling elective surgeries was helpful to increase ICU capabilities and that hospitals should establish clearly defined thresholds at which surgeries are limited during future surge events. ICU staff was the most limited resource; staff shortages were improved by the use of tiered staffing models, just-in-time training for non-ICU clinicians, designated treatment teams, and deployment of trainees. Personal protective equipment (PPE) shortages and reuse were widespread, causing substantial distress among clinicians; hands-on PPE training was helpful to reduce clinicians' anxiety. Transparency and involvement of frontline clinicians as stakeholders were important components of effective emergency responses and helped to maintain trust among staff. INTERPRETATION: We identified several strategies potentially to mitigate strain as perceived by intensivists working in both tertiary and community hospital settings. Our study also demonstrated the importance of trust and transparency between frontline staff and hospital leadership as key components of effective emergency responses during public health crises.


Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , COVID-19 , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Health Workforce , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration , Physicians , Arizona , California , Critical Care Nursing , Elective Surgical Procedures , Equipment Reuse , Female , Hospitals, Community/organization & administration , Humans , Internship and Residency , Leadership , Louisiana , Male , Michigan , New York , Nurses/supply & distribution , Organizational Policy , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , Process Assessment, Health Care , Qualitative Research , SARS-CoV-2 , Stakeholder Participation , Surge Capacity , Tertiary Care Centers/organization & administration , Washington
7.
Crit Care Med ; 49(7): 1038-1048, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1246785

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has strained many healthcare systems. In response, U.S. hospitals altered their care delivery systems, but there are few data regarding specific structural changes. Understanding these changes is important to guide interpretation of outcomes and inform pandemic preparedness. We sought to characterize emergency responses across hospitals in the United States over time and in the context of local case rates early in the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. DESIGN: We surveyed hospitals from a national acute care trials group regarding operational and structural changes made in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic from January to August 2020. We collected prepandemic characteristics and changes to hospital system, space, staffing, and equipment during the pandemic. We compared the timing of these changes with county-level coronavirus disease 2019 case rates. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: U.S. hospitals participating in the Prevention and Early Treatment of Acute Lung Injury Network Coronavirus Disease 2019 Observational study. Site investigators at each hospital collected local data. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Forty-five sites participated (94% response rate). System-level changes (incident command activation and elective procedure cancellation) occurred at nearly all sites, preceding rises in local case rates. The peak inpatient census during the pandemic was greater than the prior hospital bed capacity in 57% of sites with notable regional variation. Nearly half (49%) expanded ward capacity, and 63% expanded ICU capacity, with nearly all bed expansion achieved through repurposing of clinical spaces. Two-thirds of sites adapted staffing to care for patients with coronavirus disease 2019, with 48% implementing tiered staffing models, 49% adding temporary physicians, nurses, or respiratory therapists, and 30% changing the ratios of physicians or nurses to patients. CONCLUSIONS: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic prompted widespread system-level changes, but front-line clinical care varied widely according to specific hospital needs and infrastructure. Linking operational changes to care delivery processes is a necessary step to understand the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on patient outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Hospitals , Surge Capacity/organization & administration , Critical Care/organization & administration , Hospital Bed Capacity , Humans , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States/epidemiology , Workforce/organization & administration
8.
J Clin Med ; 10(7)2021 Mar 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1154435

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We performed a phenome-wide association study to identify pre-existing conditions related to Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prognosis across the medical phenome and how they vary by race. METHODS: The study is comprised of 53,853 patients who were tested/diagnosed for COVID-19 between 10 March and 2 September 2020 at a large academic medical center. RESULTS: Pre-existing conditions strongly associated with hospitalization were renal failure, pulmonary heart disease, and respiratory failure. Hematopoietic conditions were associated with intensive care unit (ICU) admission/mortality and mental disorders were associated with mortality in non-Hispanic Whites. Circulatory system and genitourinary conditions were associated with ICU admission/mortality in non-Hispanic Blacks. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding pre-existing clinical diagnoses related to COVID-19 outcomes informs the need for targeted screening to support specific vulnerable populations to improve disease prevention and healthcare delivery.

9.
Ann Am Thorac Soc ; 18(7): 1129-1137, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-999860

ABSTRACT

Rationale: The Epic Deterioration Index (EDI) is a proprietary prediction model implemented in over 100 U.S. hospitals that was widely used to support medical decision-making during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. The EDI has not been independently evaluated, and other proprietary models have been shown to be biased against vulnerable populations. Objectives: To independently evaluate the EDI in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 overall and in disproportionately affected subgroups. Methods: We studied adult patients admitted with COVID-19 to units other than the intensive care unit at a large academic medical center from March 9 through May 20, 2020. We used the EDI, calculated at 15-minute intervals, to predict a composite outcome of intensive care unit-level care, mechanical ventilation, or in-hospital death. In a subset of patients hospitalized for at least 48 hours, we also evaluated the ability of the EDI to identify patients at low risk of experiencing this composite outcome during their remaining hospitalization. Results: Among 392 COVID-19 hospitalizations meeting inclusion criteria, 103 (26%) met the composite outcome. The median age of the cohort was 64 (interquartile range, 53-75) with 168 (43%) Black patients and 169 (43%) women. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of the EDI was 0.79 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.84). EDI predictions did not differ by race or sex. When exploring clinically relevant thresholds of the EDI, we found patients who met or exceeded an EDI of 68.8 made up 14% of the study cohort and had a 74% probability of experiencing the composite outcome during their hospitalization with a sensitivity of 39% and a median lead time of 24 hours from when this threshold was first exceeded. Among the 286 patients hospitalized for at least 48 hours who had not experienced the composite outcome, 14 (13%) never exceeded an EDI of 37.9, with a negative predictive value of 90% and a sensitivity above this threshold of 91%. Conclusions: We found the EDI identifies small subsets of high-risk and low-risk patients with COVID-19 with good discrimination, although its clinical use as an early warning system is limited by low sensitivity. These findings highlight the importance of independent evaluation of proprietary models before widespread operational use among patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Aged , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
11.
JAMA Netw Open ; 3(10): e2025197, 2020 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-882319

ABSTRACT

Importance: Black patients are overrepresented in the number of COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations, and deaths in the US. Reasons for this disparity may be due to underlying comorbidities or sociodemographic factors that require further exploration. Objective: To systematically determine patient characteristics associated with racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19 outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used comparative groups of patients tested or treated for COVID-19 at the University of Michigan from March 10, 2020, to April 22, 2020, with an outcome update through July 28, 2020. A group of randomly selected untested individuals were included for comparison. Examined factors included race/ethnicity, age, smoking, alcohol consumption, comorbidities, body mass index (BMI; calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared), and residential-level socioeconomic characteristics. Exposure: In-house polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests, commercial antibody tests, nasopharynx or oropharynx PCR deployed by the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services and reverse transcription-PCR tests performed in external labs. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were being tested for COVID-19, having test results positive for COVID-19 or being diagnosed with COVID-19, being hospitalized for COVID-19, requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission for COVID-19, and COVID-19-related mortality (including inpatient and outpatient). Medical comorbidities were defined from the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, codes and were aggregated into a comorbidity score. Associations with COVID-19 outcomes were examined using odds ratios (ORs). Results: Of 5698 patients tested for COVID-19 (mean [SD] age, 47.4 [20.9] years; 2167 [38.0%] men; mean [SD] BMI, 30.0 [8.0]), most were non-Hispanic White (3740 patients [65.6%]) or non-Hispanic Black (1058 patients [18.6%]). The comparison group included 7168 individuals who were not tested (mean [SD] age, 43.1 [24.1] years; 3257 [45.4%] men; mean [SD] BMI, 28.5 [7.1]). Among 1139 patients diagnosed with COVID-19, 492 (43.2%) were White and 442 (38.8%) were Black; 523 (45.9%) were hospitalized, 283 (24.7%) were admitted to the ICU, and 88 (7.7%) died. Adjusting for age, sex, socioeconomic status, and comorbidity score, Black patients were more likely to be hospitalized compared with White patients (OR, 1.72 [95% CI, 1.15-2.58]; P = .009). In addition to older age, male sex, and obesity, living in densely populated areas was associated with increased risk of hospitalization (OR, 1.10 [95% CI, 1.01-1.19]; P = .02). In the overall population, higher risk of hospitalization was also observed in patients with preexisting type 2 diabetes (OR, 1.82 [95% CI, 1.25-2.64]; P = .02) and kidney disease (OR, 2.87 [95% CI, 1.87-4.42]; P < .001). Compared with White patients, obesity was associated with higher risk of having test results positive for COVID-19 among Black patients (White: OR, 1.37 [95% CI, 1.01-1.84]; P = .04. Black: OR, 3.11 [95% CI, 1.64-5.90]; P < .001; P for interaction = .02). Having any cancer was associated with higher risk of positive COVID-19 test results for Black patients (OR, 1.82 [95% CI, 1.19-2.78]; P = .005) but not White patients (OR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.84-1.40]; P = .53; P for interaction = .04). Overall comorbidity burden was associated with higher risk of hospitalization in White patients (OR, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.11-1.53]; P = .001) but not in Black patients (OR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.83-1.17]; P = .88; P for interaction = .02), as was type 2 diabetes (White: OR, 2.59 [95% CI, 1.49-4.48]; P < .001; Black: OR, 1.17 [95% CI, 0.66-2.06]; P = .59; P for interaction = .046). No statistically significant racial differences were found in ICU admission and mortality based on adjusted analysis. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that preexisting type 2 diabetes or kidney diseases and living in high-population density areas were associated with higher risk for COVID-19 hospitalization. Associations of risk factors with COVID-19 outcomes differed by race.


Subject(s)
Black or African American , Coronavirus Infections/ethnology , Health Status Disparities , Hospitalization , Pneumonia, Viral/ethnology , White People , Adult , Aged , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Kidney Diseases/epidemiology , Male , Michigan/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Obesity/epidemiology , Odds Ratio , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Population Density , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
13.
medRxiv ; 2020 Jul 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-721055

ABSTRACT

Importance The diagnostic tests for COVID-19 have a high false negative rate, but not everyone with an initial negative result is re-tested. Michigan Medicine, being one of the primary regional centers accepting COVID-19 cases, provided an ideal setting for studying COVID-19 repeated testing patterns during the first wave of the pandemic. Objective To identify the characteristics of patients who underwent repeated testing for COVID-19 and determine if repeated testing was associated with patient characteristics and with downstream outcomes among positive cases. Design This cross-sectional study described the pattern of testing for COVID-19 at Michigan Medicine. The main hypothesis under consideration is whether patient characteristics differed between those tested once and those who underwent multiple tests. We then restrict our attention to those that had at least one positive test and study repeated testing patterns in patients with severe COVID-19 related outcomes (testing positive, hospitalization and ICU care). Setting Demographic and clinical characteristics, test results, and health outcomes for 15,920 patients presenting to Michigan Medicine between March 10 and June 4, 2020 for a diagnostic test for COVID-19 were collected from their electronic medical records on June 24, 2020. Data on the number and types of tests administered to a given patient, as well as the sequences of patient-specific test results were derived from records of patient laboratory results. Participants Anyone tested between March 10 and June 4, 2020 at Michigan Medicine with a diagnostic test for COVID-19 in their Electronic Health Records were included in our analysis. Exposures Comparison of repeated testing across patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and patient outcomes Main Outcomes and Measures Whether patients underwent repeated diagnostic testing for SARS CoV-2 in Michigan Medicine Results Between March 10th and June 4th, 19,540 tests were ordered for 15,920 patients, with most patients only tested once (13596, 85.4%) and never testing positive (14753, 92.7%). There were 5 patients who got tested 10 or more times and there were substantial variations in test results within a patient. After fully adjusting for patient and neighborhood socioeconomic status (NSES) and demographic characteristics, patients with circulatory diseases (OR: 1.42; 95% CI: (1.18, 1.72)), any cancer (OR: 1.14; 95% CI: (1.01, 1.29)), Type 2 diabetes (OR: 1.22; 95% CI: (1.06, 1.39)), kidney diseases (OR: 1.95; 95% CI: (1.71, 2.23)), and liver diseases (OR: 1.30; 95% CI: (1.11, 1.50)) were found to have higher odds of undergoing repeated testing when compared to those without. Additionally, as compared to non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks were found to have higher odds (OR: 1.21; 95% CI: (1.03, 1.43)) of receiving additional testing. Females were found to have lower odds (OR: 0.86; 95% CI: (0.76, 0.96)) of receiving additional testing than males. Neighborhood poverty level also affected whether to receive additional testing. For 1% increase in proportion of population with annual income below the federal poverty level, the odds ratio of receiving repeated testing is 1.01 (OR: 1.01; 95% CI: (1.00, 1.01)). Focusing on only those 1167 patients with at least one positive result in their full testing history, patient age in years (OR: 1.01; 95% CI: (1.00, 1.03)), prior history of kidney diseases (OR: 2.15; 95% CI: (1.36, 3.41)) remained significantly different between patients who underwent repeated testing and those who did not. After adjusting for both patient demographic factors and NSES, hospitalization (OR: 7.44; 95% CI: (4.92, 11.41)) and ICU-level care (OR: 6.97; 95% CI: (4.48, 10.98)) were significantly associated with repeated testing. Of these 1167 patients, 306 got repeated testing and 1118 tests were done on these 306 patients, of which 810 (72.5%) were done during inpatient stays, substantiating that most repeated tests for test positive patients were done during hospitalization or ICU care. Additionally, using repeated testing data we estimate the "real world" false negative rate of the RT-PCR diagnostic test was 23.8% (95% CI: (19.5%, 28.5%)). Conclusions and Relevance This study sought to quantify the pattern of repeated testing for COVID-19 at Michigan Medicine. While most patients were tested once and received a negative result, a meaningful subset of patients (2324, 14.6% of the population who got tested) underwent multiple rounds of testing (5,944 tests were done in total on these 2324 patients, with an average of 2.6 tests per person), with 10 or more tests for five patients. Both hospitalizations and ICU care differed significantly between patients who underwent repeated testing versus those only tested once as expected. These results shed light on testing patterns and have important implications for understanding the variation of repeated testing results within and between patients.

14.
medRxiv ; 2020 Jun 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-721051

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: Blacks/African-Americans are overrepresented in the number of COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations and deaths. Reasons for this disparity have not been well-characterized but may be due to underlying comorbidities or sociodemographic factors. OBJECTIVE: To systematically determine patient characteristics associated with racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19 outcomes. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study with comparative control groups. SETTING: Patients tested for COVID-19 at University of Michigan Medicine from March 10, 2020 to April 22, 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 5,698 tested patients and two sets of comparison groups who were not tested for COVID-19: randomly selected unmatched controls (n = 7,211) and frequency-matched controls by race, age, and sex (n = 13,351). Main Outcomes and Measures: We identified factors associated with testing and testing positive for COVID-19, being hospitalized, requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and mortality (in/out-patient during the time frame). Factors included race/ethnicity, age, smoking, alcohol consumption, healthcare utilization, and residential-level socioeconomic characteristics (SES; i.e., education, unemployment, population density, and poverty rate). Medical comorbidities were defined from the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes, and were aggregated into a comorbidity score. RESULTS: Of 5,698 patients, (median age, 47 years; 38% male; mean BMI, 30.1), the majority were non-Hispanic Whites (NHW, 59.2%) and non-Hispanic Black/African-Americans (NHAA, 17.2%). Among 1,119 diagnosed, there were 41.2% NHW and 37.4% NHAA; 44.8% hospitalized, 20.6% admitted to ICU, and 3.8% died. Adjusting for age, sex, and SES, NHAA were 1.66 times more likely to be hospitalized (95% CI, 1.09-2.52; P=.02), 1.52 times more likely to enter ICU (95% CI, 0.92-2.52; P=.10). In addition to older age, male sex and obesity, high population density neighborhood (OR, 1.27 associated with one SD change [95% CI, 1.20-1.76]; P=.02) was associated with hospitalization. Pre-existing kidney disease led to 2.55 times higher risk of hospitalization (95% CI, 1.62-4.02; P<.001) in the overall population and 11.9 times higher mortality risk in NHAA (95% CI, 2.2-64.7, P=.004). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Pre-existing type II diabetes/kidney diseases and living in high population density areas were associated with high risk for COVID-19 susceptibility and poor prognosis. Association of risk factors with COVID-19 outcomes differed by race. NHAA patients were disproportionately affected by obesity and kidney disease.

15.
medRxiv ; 2021 Feb 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-721052

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We perform a phenome-wide scan to identify pre-existing conditions related to COVID-19 susceptibility and prognosis across the medical phenome and how they vary by race. METHODS: The study is comprised of 53,853 patients who were tested/positive for COVID-19 between March 10 and September 2, 2020 at a large academic medical center. RESULTS: Pre-existing conditions strongly associated with hospitalization were renal failure, pulmonary heart disease, and respiratory failure. Hematopoietic conditions were associated with ICU admission/mortality and mental disorders were associated with mortality in non-Hispanic Whites. Circulatory system and genitourinary conditions were associated with ICU admission/mortality in non-Hispanic Blacks. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding pre-existing clinical diagnoses related to COVID-19 outcomes informs the need for targeted screening to support specific vulnerable populations to improve disease prevention and healthcare delivery.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL