Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 11 de 11
Filter
1.
Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes ; 2022 May 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1867474

ABSTRACT

Objective: To examine the clinical characteristics, risk of hospitalization and mortality of patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all patients with SARS-CoV-2 reinfection all Mayo Clinic sites between May 23, 2020, and June 30, 2021 (the period before emergence of delta variant in United States). The reinfection was defined as positive SARS-CoV-2 test ≥ 90 days after initial infection or 45-89 days after with symptomatic second episode. Vaccination status was classified as fully vaccinated, first dose and unvaccinated. Comparative analysis of baseline characteristics and comorbidities was performed by hospitalization and vaccination status. The survival analysis of hospitalized patients was performed using cox-proportional hazard regression. Results: Among 554 reinfected patients, 59 (10.6%) were pediatric, and 495 (89.4%) were adults. The median age was 13.9 years (interquartile range [IQR], 8.5-16.5) for pediatric and 50.2 years (IQR, 28.4-65.6) for adult population. Among adult patients, majority were unvaccinated (83.4%, n=413) and duration to reinfection from initial infection was longest in fully vaccinated group (p < .001). 42 (75%) out of 56 patients were seropositive within seven days of reinfection. In hospitalized adult patients, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was an independent risk factor for mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.35; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.51). Conclusion: In this study, majority of adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 reinfection were unvaccinated. Furthermore, the duration to reinfection was longest in fully vaccinated individuals. Seropositivity was common among adult patients.

3.
Int J Infect Dis ; 120: 88-95, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1804273

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern has led to significant phenotypical changes in transmissibility, virulence, and public health measures. Our study used clinical data to compare characteristics between a Delta variant wave and a pre-Delta variant wave of hospitalized patients. METHODS: This single-center retrospective study defined a wave as an increasing number of COVID-19 hospitalizations, which peaked and later decreased. Data from the United States Department of Health and Human Services were used to identify the waves' primary variant. Wave 1 (August 8, 2020-April 1, 2021) was characterized by heterogeneous variants, whereas Wave 2 (June 26, 2021-October 18, 2021) was predominantly the Delta variant. Descriptive statistics, regression techniques, and machine learning approaches supported the comparisons between waves. RESULTS: From the cohort (N = 1318), Wave 2 patients (n = 665) were more likely to be younger, have fewer comorbidities, require more care in the intensive care unit, and show an inflammatory profile with higher C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, fibrinogen, prothrombin time, activated thromboplastin time, and international normalized ratio compared with Wave 1 patients (n = 653). The gradient boosting model showed an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.854 (sensitivity 86.4%; specificity 61.5%; positive predictive value 73.8%; negative predictive value 78.3%). CONCLUSION: Clinical and laboratory characteristics can be used to estimate the COVID-19 variant regardless of genomic testing availability. This finding has implications for variant-driven treatment protocols and further research.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitalization , Humans , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
4.
J Intern Med ; 292(1): 127-135, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1759213

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: While COVID-19 immunization programs attempted to reach targeted rates, cases rose significantly since the emergence of the delta variant. This retrospective cohort study describes the correlation between antispike antibodies and outcomes of hospitalized, breakthrough cases during the delta variant surge. METHODS: All patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction hospitalized at Mayo Clinic Florida from 19 June 2021 to 11 November 2021 were considered for analysis. Cases were analyzed by vaccination status. Breakthrough cases were then analyzed by low and high antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, with a cut-off value of ≥132 U/ml. Outcomes included hospital length of stay (LOS), need for intensive care unit (ICU), mechanical ventilation, and mortality. We used 1:1 nearest neighbor propensity score matching without replacement to assess for confounders. RESULTS: Among 627 hospitalized patients with COVID-19, vaccine breakthrough cases were older with more comorbidities compared to unvaccinated. After propensity score matching, the unvaccinated patients had higher mortality (27 [28.4%] vs. 12 [12.6%], p = 0.002) and LOS (7 [1.0-57.0] vs. 5 [1.0-31.0] days, p = 0.011). In breakthrough cases, low-titer patients were more likely to be solid organ transplant recipients (16 [34.0%] vs. 9 [12.3%], p = 0.006), with higher need for ICU care (24 [51.1%] vs. 22 [11.0%], p = 0.034), longer hospital LOS (median 6 vs. 5 days, p = 0.013), and higher mortality (10 [21.3%] vs. 5 [6.8%], p = 0.025) than high-titer patients. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized breakthrough cases were more likely to have underlying risk factors than unvaccinated patients. Low-spike antibody titers may serve as an indicator for poor prognosis in breakthrough cases admitted to the hospital.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19 Vaccines , Hospitalization , Humans , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus
5.
EuropePMC;
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-328572

ABSTRACT

Background: and purpose Cognitive complaints are common in patients recovering from Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), yet their etiology is often unclear. We assess factors that contribute to cognitive impairment in ambulatory versus hospitalized patients during the sub-acute stage of recovery. Methods: Participants were prospectively recruited from a hospital-wide registry. All patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection using a real-time reverse transcriptase polymerasechain-reaction assay. Patients ≤ 18 years-of-age and those with a pre-existing major neurocognitive disorder were excluded. Participants completed an extensive neuropsychological questionnaire and a computerized cognitive screen via remote telemedicine platform. Rates of subjective and objective neuropsychological impairment were compared between the ambulatory and hospitalized groups. Factors associated with impairment were explored separately within each group. Results: A total of 102 patients (76 ambulatory, 26 hospitalized) completed the symptom inventory and neurocognitive tests 24 ± 22 days following laboratory confirmation of SARSCoV-2 infection. Hospitalized and ambulatory patients self-reported high rates of cognitive impairment (27-40%), without differences between the groups. However, hospitalized patients showed higher rates of objective impairment in visual memory (30% vs. 4%;p=0.001) and psychomotor speed (41% vs. 15%;p=0.008). Objective cognitive test performance was associated with anxiety, depression, fatigue, and pain in the ambulatory but not the hospitalized group. Conclusions: Focal cognitive deficits are more common in hospitalized than ambulatory patients. Cognitive performance is associated with neuropsychiatric symptoms in ambulatory but not hospitalized patients. Objective neurocognitive measures can provide essential information to inform neurologic triage and should be included as endpoints in clinical trials.

6.
Mayo Clin Proc ; 97(2): 327-332, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1665267

ABSTRACT

Anti-spike monoclonal antibodies have proven invaluable in preventing severe outcomes from COVID-19, including hospitalization and death. The rise of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant begs the question of whether monoclonal antibodies maintain similar efficacy now as they had when the alpha and beta variants predominated, when they were first assessed and approved. We used a retrospective cohort to compare rates of severe outcomes in an epoch in which alpha and beta were predominant compared with delta. A total of 5356 patients were infused during the alpha/beta variant-predominant (n=4874) and delta variant-predominant (n=482) era. Overall, odds of severe infection were 3.0% of patients in the alpha/beta-predominant era compared with 4.9% in the delta-predominant cohort. The unadjusted odds ratio (OR) was higher for severe disease in the delta era (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 0.96 to 2.89), particularly when adjusted for Charlson Comorbidity Index (adjusted OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.30 to 3.08). The higher odds of severe infection could be due to a more virulent delta variant, although the possibility of decreased anti-spike monoclonal antibody effectiveness in the clinical setting cannot be excluded. Research into the most effective strategies for using and improving anti-spike monoclonals for the treatment of emerging variants is warranted.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Immunologic Factors/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Aged , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Acuity , Retrospective Studies , United States/epidemiology
7.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2021 Nov 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1493775

ABSTRACT

We characterized COVID-19 breakthrough cases admitted to a single center in Florida. With the emergence of delta variant, an increased number of hospitalizations was seen due to breakthrough infections. These patients were older and more likely to have comorbidities. Preventive measures should be maintained even after vaccination.

8.
Mayo Clin Proc ; 96(1): 152-155, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1065436

ABSTRACT

Health care workers are at high risk for contracting coronavirus disease 2019. However, little is known about the risk of transmission between coworkers. The objective of this study was to determine the risk of transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) between coworkers in a surgical environment. This was an observational study of 394 health care workers in a surgical environment who were exposed to 2 known SARS-CoV-2-positive coworkers. Standard infection precautions were in place at the time of the exposure. All 394 exposed workers initially underwent nasopharyngeal swab testing for SARS-CoV-2 using the polymerase chain reaction technique. Of the original group, 387 were tested again with the same technique 1 week later. Of 394 SARS-CoV-2-exposed health care workers initially tested, 1 was positive. No new positive cases were found on repeated testing of 387 participants 1 week later. The risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in a health care unit with universal masking and appropriate hand hygiene is low. This finding should provide some reassurance to surgical practices as they reopen.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Health Personnel , Infection Control/methods , Operating Rooms , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Female , Florida/epidemiology , Hand Hygiene , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Exposure , Personal Protective Equipment , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Mayo Clin Proc ; 96(3): 601-618, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-988744

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To report the Mayo Clinic experience with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related to patient outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients with COVID-19 diagnosed between March 1, 2020, and July 31, 2020, at any of the Mayo Clinic sites. We abstracted pertinent comorbid conditions such as age, sex, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index variables, and treatments received. Factors associated with hospitalization and mortality were assessed in univariate and multivariate models. RESULTS: A total of 7891 patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection with research authorization on file received care across the Mayo Clinic sites during the study period. Of these, 7217 patients were adults 18 years or older who were analyzed further. A total of 897 (11.4%) patients required hospitalization, and 354 (4.9%) received care in the intensive care unit (ICU). All hospitalized patients were reviewed by a COVID-19 Treatment Review Panel, and 77.5% (695 of 897) of inpatients received a COVID-19-directed therapy. Overall mortality was 1.2% (94 of 7891), with 7.1% (64 of 897) mortality in hospitalized patients and 11.3% (40 of 354) in patients requiring ICU care. CONCLUSION: Mayo Clinic outcomes of patients with COVID-19 infection in the ICU, hospital, and community compare favorably with those reported nationally. This likely reflects the impact of interprofessional multidisciplinary team evaluation, effective leveraging of clinical trials and available treatments, deployment of remote monitoring tools, and maintenance of adequate operating capacity to not require surge adjustments. These best practices can help guide other health care systems with the continuing response to the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Research , COVID-19/therapy , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescent , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Hospitalization/trends , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Retrospective Studies
10.
Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes ; 5(1): 151-160, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-974356

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created an extremely disruptive challenge for health care leaders that required a rapid, dynamic, and innovative response. The purpose of this manuscript is to share the leadership actions and decisions at Mayo Clinic in Florida during the first 6 months of the pandemic (February to July 2020). We note 4 strategies that contributed to an effective response: (1) leverage experience with disaster preparedness and mobilize regional and national networks; (2) use surge models to anticipate and to address supply chain issues as well as practical and financial effects of the pandemic; (3) adapt creatively to establish new safety and procedural protocols in various areas for various populations; and (4) communicate timely information effectively and be the common source of truth. Mayo Clinic in Florida was able to address the surges of patients with COVID-19, to provide ongoing tertiary care, and to restore function within the first 6 months with new, strengthened practices and protocols.

11.
Am J Med Qual ; 35(6): 444-449, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-692460

ABSTRACT

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the study institution recognized the importance of providing preoperative COVID-19 testing and symptom screening to ensure patient safety. A multidisciplinary quality improvement team used Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control methodology to understand the issues, identify solutions, and streamline patient flow. The existing preoperative evaluation (POE) clinic was utilized as a centralized entity to provide COVID-19 testing, symptom screening, and infection prevention education in addition to routine preoperative medical optimization. With the new process, the percentage of patients with COVID-19 testing results returned before surgery increased from 10% to 100%. Of the 593 asymptomatic patients screened by the POE clinic, 2 were found to have positive results. These patients had their surgeries postponed until proper recovery. The study institution has extended this new process to all surgical patients, warranting facility readiness for the resumption of elective surgery.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Elective Surgical Procedures , Patient Safety/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Preoperative Period , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Humans , Mass Screening/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Quality Improvement , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL