Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 13 de 13
Filter
1.
PLoS One ; 17(3): e0264325, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1714778

ABSTRACT

Patients with severe mental illness (SMI) i.e. schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disorder are at increased risk of severe outcomes if infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Whether patients with SMI are at increased risk of COVID-19 is, however, sparsely investigated. This important issue must be addressed as the current pandemic could have the potential to increase the existing gap in lifetime mortality between this group of patients and the background population. The objective of this study was to determine whether a diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or bipolar disorder is associated with an increased risk of COVID-19. A cross-sectional study was performed between January 18th and February 25th, 2021. Of 7071 eligible patients with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or bipolar disorder, 1355 patients from seven psychiatric centres in the Capital Region of Denmark were screened for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies. A total of 1258 unvaccinated patients were included in the analysis. The mean age was 40.5 years (SD 14.6), 54.3% were female. Fifty-nine of the 1258 participants had a positive SARS-CoV-2 antibody test, corresponding to a adjusted seroprevalence of 4.96% (95% CI 3.87-6.35). No significant difference in SARS-CoV-2-risk was found between female and male participants (RR = 1.32; 95% CI 0.79-2.20; p = .290). No significant differences in seroprevalences between schizophrenia and bipolar disease were found (RR = 1.12; 95% CI 0.67-1.87; p = .667). Seroprevalence among 6088 unvaccinated blood donors from the same region and period was 12.24% (95% CI 11.41-13.11). SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among included patients with SMI was significantly lower than among blood donors (RR = 0.41; 95% CI 0.31-0.52; p < .001). Differences in seroprevalences remained significant when adjusting for gender and age, except for those aged 60 years or above. The study is registered at ClinicalTrails.gov (NCT04775407). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04775407?term=NCT04775407&draw=2&rank=1.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 , Mental Disorders , SARS-CoV-2/metabolism , Adult , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders/blood , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Seroepidemiologic Studies
2.
EuropePMC; 2020.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-318005

ABSTRACT

Background: Social distancing policies to ensure physical distance between people have become a crucial strategy in the battle against the spread of the Coronavirus. The aim of this project is to analyze and compare social distancing policies implemented in Denmark and Sweden in 2020. Despite many similarities between the two countries, their response to the Coronavirus pandemic differed markedly. Whereas authorities in Denmark initiated mandatory regulations and many severe restrictions, Swedish authorities predominantly promoted voluntary recommendations. Methods: The project is an interdisciplinary collaboration between researchers in Denmark and Sweden with different disciplinary backgrounds. The project is based on a comparative analysis, an approach that attempts to reach conclusions beyond single cases and to explain differences and similarities between objects of analysis and relations between objects against the backdrop of their contextual conditions. Data will be gathered by means of document analysis, qualitative interviews, and a questionnaire survey to address three research questions: (1) What social distancing policies regarding the Coronavirus have been formulated and implemented, who are the policymakers behind the policy measures, which implementers are expected to implement the measures, and who are the targets that the measures ultimately seek to influence? (2) How have the social distancing policies and policy measures been justified, and what types of knowledge form the basis for the measures? and (3) What are the differences and similarities in citizens’ perceptions of acceptability and compliance with social distancing policy measures in relation to the Coronavirus? Discussion: To create a structure for addressing the three research questions, the project applies a theoretical framework informed by the policy and implementation science literatures. The framework consists of five interdependent domains that have an impact on policy implementation: (1) policymakers;(2) policy characteristics;(3) implementers;(4) targets;and (5) policy environment. Details of the framework are provided in the article.

3.
J Infect Dis ; 2022 Jan 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1621617

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to assess if influenza vaccination has an impact on the risk of COVID-19. A cohort of 46,112 health care workers were tested for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 and filled in a survey on COVID-19 symptoms, hospitalization, and influenza vaccination. The RR of hospitalization due to SARS-CoV-2 for influenza vaccinated compared with unvaccinated participants was 1.00 for the seasonal vaccination in 2019/2020 (CI 0.56-1.78, p=1.00). Likewise, no clinical effect of influenza vaccination on development of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was found. The present findings indicate that influenza vaccination does not affect the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19.

4.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(20)2021 10 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1477948

ABSTRACT

Social distancing measures have been a key component in government strategies to mitigate COVID-19 globally. Based on official documents, this study aimed to identify, compare and analyse public social distancing policy measures adopted in Denmark and Sweden regarding the coronavirus from 1 March 2020 until 1 October 2020. A key difference was the greater emphasis on laws and executive orders (sticks) in Denmark, which allowed the country to adopt many stricter policy measures than Sweden, which relied mostly on general guidelines and recommendations (sermons). The main policy adopters in Denmark were the government and the Danish Parliament, whereas the Public Health Agency issued most policies in Sweden, reflecting a difference in political governance and administrative structure in the two countries. During the study period, Sweden had noticeably higher rates of COVID-19 deaths and hospitalizations per 100,000 population than Denmark, yet it is difficult to determine the impact or relative effectiveness of sermons and sticks, particularly with regard to broader and longer-term health, economic and societal effects.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Physical Distancing , Denmark/epidemiology , Humans , Public Policy , SARS-CoV-2 , Sweden/epidemiology
5.
Microbiol Spectr ; 9(2): e0090421, 2021 10 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1476401

ABSTRACT

Most individuals seroconvert after infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), but being seronegative is observed in 1 to 9%. We aimed to investigate the risk factors associated with being seronegative following PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. In a prospective cohort study, we screened health care workers (HCW) in the Capital Region of Denmark for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We performed three rounds of screening from April to October 2020 using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) method targeting SARS-CoV-2 total antibodies. Data on all participants' PCR for SARS-CoV-2 RNA were captured from national registries. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models were applied to investigate the probability of being seronegative and the related risk factors, respectively. Of 36,583 HCW, 866 (2.4%) had a positive PCR before or during the study period. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 866 HCW was 42 (31 to 53) years, and 666 (77%) were female. After a median of 132 (range, 35 to 180) days, 21 (2.4%) of 866 were seronegative. In a multivariable model, independent risk factors for being seronegative were self-reported asymptomatic or mild infection hazard ratio (HR) of 6.6 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6 to 17; P < 0.001) and body mass index (BMI) of ≥30, HR 3.1 (95% CI, 1.1 to 8.8; P = 0.039). Only a few (2.4%) HCW were not seropositive. Asymptomatic or mild infection as well as a BMI above 30 were associated with being seronegative. Since the presence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 reduces the risk of reinfection, efforts to protect HCW with risk factors for being seronegative may be needed in future COVID-19 surges. IMPORTANCE Most individuals seroconvert after infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), but negative serology is observed in 1 to 9%. We found that asymptomatic or mild infection as well as a BMI above 30 were associated with being seronegative. Since the presence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 reduces the risk of reinfection, efforts to protect HCW with risk factors for being seronegative may be needed in future COVID-19 surges.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Serological Testing , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , Cohort Studies , Coronavirus Nucleocapsid Proteins/immunology , Denmark , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Phosphoproteins/immunology , Polymerase Chain Reaction , RNA, Viral/analysis , Seroconversion , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology
6.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 28(5): 710-717, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1415294

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) are a key factor in protecting against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We examined longitudinal changes in seroprevalence in healthcare workers (HCWs) in Copenhagen and the protective effect of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: In this prospective study, screening for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 (ELISA) was offered to HCWs three times over 6 months. HCW characteristics were obtained by questionnaires. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04346186. RESULTS: From April to October 2020 we screened 44 698 HCWs, of whom 2811 were seropositive at least once. The seroprevalence increased from 4.0% (1501/37 452) to 7.4% (2022/27 457) during the period (p < 0.001) and was significantly higher than in non-HCWs. Frontline HCWs had a significantly increased risk of seropositivity compared to non-frontline HCWs, with risk ratios (RRs) at the three rounds of 1.49 (95%CI 1.34-1.65, p < 0.001), 1.52 (1.39-1.68, p < 0.001) and 1.50 (1.38-1.64, p < 0.001). The seroprevalence was 1.42- to 2.25-fold higher (p < 0.001) in HCWs from dedicated COVID-19 wards than in other frontline HCWs. Seropositive HCWs had an RR of 0.35 (0.15-0.85, p 0.012) of reinfection during the following 6 months, and 2115 out of 2248 (95%) of those who were seropositive during rounds one or two remained seropositive after 4-6 months. The 133 of 2248 participants (5.0%) who seroreverted were slightly older and reported fewer symptoms than other seropositive participants. CONCLUSIONS: HCWs remained at increased risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 during the 6-month period. Seropositivity against SARS-CoV-2 persisted for at least 6 months in the vast majority of HCWs and was associated with a significantly lower risk of reinfection.

7.
Biomark Insights ; 16: 11772719211034685, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1365299

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Elevated soluble urokinase Plasminogen Activator Receptor (suPAR) is a biomarker associated with adverse outcomes. We aimed to investigate the associations between plasma suPAR levels (testing the cut-offs ⩽4, 4-6, and ⩾6 ng/mL) with risk of 14-day mortality, and with the risk of mechanical ventilation in patients that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Observational cohort study of patients presenting with symptoms of COVID-19 at Department of Emergency Medicine, Amager and Hvidovre Hospital, Denmark from March 19th, 2020 to April 3rd, 2020. Plasma suPAR was measured using suPARnostic technologies. Patients were followed for development of mechanical ventilation and mortality for 14 days. Validation of our findings were carried out in a similar sized COVID-19 patient cohort from Mikkeli Central Hospital, Finland. RESULTS: Among 386 patients with symptoms of COVID-19, the median (interquartile range) age was 64 years (46-77), 57% were women, median suPAR was 4.0 ng/mL (2.7-5.9). In total, 35 patients (9.1%) died during the 14 days follow-up. Patients with suPAR ⩽4 ng/mL (N = 196; 50.8%) had a low risk of mortality (N = 2; 1.0%; negative predictive value of 99.0%, specificity 55.3%, sensitivity 95.2%, positive predictive value 17.4%). Among patients with suPAR ⩾6 ng/mL (N = 92; 23.8%), 16 died (17.4%). About 99 patients (25.6%) tested positive for SARS CoV-2 and of those 12 (12.1%) developed need for mechanical ventilation. None of the SARS-CoV-2 positive patients with suPAR ⩽4 ng/mL (N = 28; 38.8%) needed mechanical ventilation or died. The Mikkeli Central Hospital validation cohort confirmed our findings concerning suPAR cut-offs for risk of development of mechanical ventilation and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with symptoms of COVID-19 and suPAR ⩽4 or ⩾6 ng/mL had low or high risk, respectively, concerning the need for mechanical ventilation or mortality. We suggest cut-offs for identification of risk groups in patients presenting to the ED with symptoms of or confirmed COVID-19.

8.
J Emerg Med ; 61(3): 298-313, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1157477

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (The Covid-19 pandemic) strains health care capacity. Better risk stratification, with discharge of patients with a predicted mild disease trajectory, can ease this burden. Elevated blood-soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) has previously been shown to be associated with risk of intubation in confirmed COVID-19 patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether point-of-care measures of suPAR in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with symptoms of COVID-19 can identify patients that can be safely discharged. METHODS: Observational cohort study including all patients in the ED with symptoms of COVID-19 from March 19 to April 3, 2020. SuPAR was measured at first presentation. Review of electronic patient records 14 days after admission was used to assess disease trajectory. Primary endpoints were mild, moderate, severe, or very severe trajectory. The predictive value of suPAR, National Early Warning Score (NEWS), C-reactive protein (CRP), and duration of symptoms was calculated using receiver operating characteristics (ROC). RESULTS: Of 386 patients, 171 (44%) had a mild disease trajectory, 79 (20%) a moderate, 63 (16%) a severe, and 73 (19%) a very severe disease trajectory. Low suPAR was a strong marker of mild disease trajectory. Results suggest a cut-off for discharge for suPAR < 2.0 ng/mL if suPAR is used as a single parameter, and <3.0 ng/mL when combined with NEWS ≤ 4 and CRP < 10 mg/L. CONCLUSION: suPAR is a potential biomarker for triage and safe early discharge of patients with COVID-19 symptoms in the ED. suPAR can be used even before SARS-CoV-2 status is known.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Receptors, Urokinase Plasminogen Activator , Biomarkers , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , Pandemics , Patient Discharge , Prognosis , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 20(12): 1401-1408, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1009965

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Health-care workers are thought to be highly exposed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in health-care workers and the proportion of seroconverted health-care workers with previous symptoms of COVID-19. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, screening was offered to health-care workers in the Capital Region of Denmark, including medical, nursing, and other students who were associated with hospitals in the region. Screening included point-of-care tests for IgM and IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Test results and participant characteristics were recorded. Results were compared with findings in blood donors in the Capital Region in the study period. FINDINGS: Between April 15 and April 23, 2020, we screened 29 295 health-care workers, of whom 28 792 (98·28%) provided their test results. We identified 1163 (4·04% [95% CI 3·82-4·27]) seropositive health-care workers. Seroprevalence was higher in health-care workers than in blood donors (142 [3·04%] of 4672; risk ratio [RR] 1·33 [95% CI 1·12-1·58]; p<0·001). Seroprevalence was higher in male health-care workers (331 [5·45%] of 6077) than in female health-care workers (832 [3·66%] of 22 715; RR 1·49 [1·31-1·68]; p<0·001). Frontline health-care workers working in hospitals had a significantly higher seroprevalence (779 [4·55%] of 16 356) than health-care workers in other settings (384 [3·29%] of 11 657; RR 1·38 [1·22-1·56]; p<0·001). Health-care workers working on dedicated COVID-19 wards (95 [7·19%] of 1321) had a significantly higher seroprevalence than other frontline health-care workers working in hospitals (696 [4·35%] of 15 983; RR 1·65 [1·34-2·03]; p<0·001). 622 [53·5%] of 1163 seropositive participants reported symptoms attributable to SARS-CoV-2. Loss of taste or smell was the symptom that was most strongly associated with seropositivity (377 [32·39%] of 1164 participants with this symptom were seropositive vs 786 [2·84%] of 27 628 without this symptom; RR 11·38 [10·22-12·68]). The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04346186. INTERPRETATION: The prevalence of health-care workers with antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was low but higher than in blood donors. The risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in health-care workers was related to exposure to infected patients. More than half of seropositive health-care workers reported symptoms attributable to COVID-19. FUNDING: Lundbeck Foundation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Occupational Health/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Blood Donors/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/pathology , Cohort Studies , Denmark/epidemiology , Female , Health Personnel/classification , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Immunoglobulin M/blood , Male , Middle Aged , Point-of-Care Testing , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Seroconversion , Seroepidemiologic Studies
10.
Eur Clin Respir J ; 7(1): 1833695, 2020 Oct 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-883050

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and pneumonitis often have hypoxemic respiratory failure and a need of supplementary oxygen. Guidelines recommend controlled oxygen, for most patients with a recommended interval of SpO2 between 92 and 96%. We aimed to determine if closed-loop control of oxygen was feasible in patients with COVID-19 and could maintain SpO2 in the specified interval. METHODS: Patients were prospectively enrolled in an observational study on a medical ward dedicated to patients with COVID-19. Closed-loop controlled oxygen was delivered by O2matic® which can deliver 0-15 liters/min and adjusts flow every second based on 15 seconds averaging of SpO2 measured by pulse oximetry. Lung function parameters were measured at admission. RESULTS: Fifteen patients (six women, nine men) participated in the study. Average age was 72 years. Lung function was severely impaired with FEV1, FVC and PEF reduced to approximately 50%. The average stay on the ward was 3.2 days and O2matic was used on average for 66 hours, providing 987 hours of observation. O2matic maintained SpO2 in the desired interval for 82.9% of the time. Time with SpO2 > 2% below interval was 5.1% and time with SpO2 > 2% above interval was 0.6%. CONCLUSION: Closed-loop control of oxygen to patients with COVID-19 is feasible and can maintain SpO2 in the specified interval in the majority of time. Closed-loop automated control could be of particular benefit for patients in isolation with decreased visibility, surveillance and monitoring. Further studies must examine the clinical benefits.

11.
J Am Soc Nephrol ; 31(11): 2725-2735, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-789004

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: AKI commonly occurs in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Its pathogenesis is poorly understood. The urokinase receptor system is a key regulator of the intersection between inflammation, immunity, and coagulation, and soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) has been identified as an immunologic risk factor for AKI. Whether suPAR is associated with COVID-19-related AKI is unknown. METHODS: In a multinational observational study of adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19, we measured suPAR levels in plasma samples from 352 adult patients that had been collected within 48 hours of admission. We examined the association between suPAR levels and incident in-hospital AKI. RESULTS: Of the 352 patients (57.4% were male, 13.9% were black, and mean age was 61 years), 91 (25.9%) developed AKI during their hospitalization, of whom 25 (27.4%) required dialysis. The median suPAR level was 5.61 ng/ml. AKI incidence rose with increasing suPAR tertiles, from a 6.0% incidence in patients with suPAR <4.60 ng/ml (first tertile) to a 45.8% incidence of AKI in patients with suPAR levels >6.86 ng/ml (third tertile). None of the patients with suPAR <4.60 ng/ml required dialysis during their hospitalization. In multivariable analysis, the highest suPAR tertile was associated with a 9.15-fold increase in the odds of AKI (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 3.64 to 22.93) and a 22.86-fold increase in the odds of requiring dialysis (95% CI, 2.77 to 188.75). The association was independent of inflammatory markers and persisted across subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Admission suPAR levels in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 are predictive of in-hospital AKI and the need for dialysis. SuPAR may be a key component of the pathophysiology of AKI in COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury/etiology , Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Receptors, Urokinase Plasminogen Activator/blood , Acute Kidney Injury/blood , Acute Kidney Injury/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
12.
Implement Sci Commun ; 1: 77, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-783711

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Social distancing policies to ensure physical distance between people have become a crucial strategy in the battle against the spread of the coronavirus. The aim of this project is to analyze and compare social distancing policies implemented in Denmark and Sweden in 2020. Despite many similarities between the two countries, their response to the coronavirus pandemic differed markedly. Whereas authorities in Denmark initiated mandatory regulations and many severe restrictions, Swedish authorities predominantly promoted voluntary recommendations. METHODS: The project is an interdisciplinary collaboration between researchers in Denmark and Sweden with different disciplinary backgrounds. The project is based on a comparative analysis, an approach that attempts to reach conclusions beyond single cases and to explain differences and similarities between objects of analysis and relations between objects against the backdrop of their contextual conditions. Data will be gathered by means of document analysis, qualitative interviews, and a questionnaire survey to address three research questions: (1) What social distancing policies regarding the coronavirus have been formulated and implemented, who are the policymakers behind the policy measures, which implementers are expected to implement the measures, and who are the targets that the measures ultimately seek to influence? (2) How have the social distancing policies and policy measures been justified, and what types of knowledge form the basis for the measures? and (3) What are the differences and similarities in citizens' perceptions of acceptability and compliance with social distancing policy measures in relation to the coronavirus? DISCUSSION: To create a structure for addressing the three research questions, the project applies a theoretical framework informed by the policy and implementation science literatures. The framework consists of five interdependent domains that have an impact on policy implementation: (1) policymakers, (2) policy characteristics, (3) implementers, (4) targets, and (5) policy environment. Details of the framework are provided in the article.

13.
Dan Med J ; 67(6)2020 May 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-363859

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The first case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 occurred in Denmark on 27 February 2020. On 10 March, the first case of COVID-19 pneumonia was admitted to Hvidovre Hospital. METHODS: Retrospective case review of individuals 18 years or older who were admitted consecutively to Hvidovre Hospital from 10 March through 23 April 2020. RESULTS: A total of 175 individuals were admitted with COVID-19 pneumonia. The median age was 71 years, 48.6% were male and 71% had at least one co-morbidity. The most commonly presenting symptoms were dyspnoea, dry cough, and fever. The majority of patients had lymphopenia, elevated liver function tests and C-reactive protein. Nearly two in three presented with multilobar infiltration by chest X-ray. Respiratory failure leading to invasive mechanical ventilation developed in 27 patients (15.4%). By 20 April, 23 of 175 (13.1%) patients remained hospitalised, 43 (24.6%) had died and 109 (62.3%) had been discharged. CONCLUSIONS: The manifestations of COVID-19 at presentation were similar to those seen in other reports. Our population was older, slightly overrepresented by women and had a high level of co-morbidity. COVID-19 admittance was associated with frequent need of intensive care and mechanical ventilation that was associated with a very high mortality. FUNDING: none. TRIAL REGISTRATION: not relevant.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/etiology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/diagnostic imaging , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Denmark , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Radiography, Thoracic , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL