Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 17 de 17
Filter
1.
Telemed J E Health ; 2022 Mar 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1769115

ABSTRACT

Recognizing emergency department overcrowding during the COVID-19 pandemic, a pathway to facilitate direct admissions for outpatients with worsening COVID-19 infection was created using the COVID-19 expansion to outpatients (COVIDEO) virtual care program. Outpatients appropriate for direct admission had oxygen saturations consistently <92% without severe respiratory distress. Pulse oximeters were proactively delivered to high-risk patients, and patients contacted the program in the event of worsening symptoms or desaturation persistently <92%. Over a 15-month period, 9,116 outpatients were managed by the program, 164 of whom were hospitalized, and 83 of those hospitalized (50.6%) were directly admitted through this pathway. Of those directly admitted, 10 (12.0%) patients required ICU admission, occurring a median of 4 days from hospital admission. The mortality rate among directly admitted patients was 3.6% (3/83). Implementation of a virtual care program to facilitate direct admissions in outpatients with COVID-19 created a safe, efficient, and patient-centered pathway of care.

3.
CMAJ ; 193(32): E1261-E1276, 2021 08 16.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1538242

ABSTRACT

CONTEXTE: Optimiser la réponse de la santé publique pour diminuer le fardeau de la COVID-19 nécessite la caractérisation de l'hétérogénéité du risque posé par la maladie à l'échelle de la population. Cependant, l'hétérogénéité du dépistage du SRAS-CoV-2 peut fausser les estimations selon le modèle d'étude analytique utilisé. Notre objectif était d'explorer les biais collisionneurs dans le cadre d'une vaste étude portant sur les déterminants de la maladie et d'évaluer les déterminants individuels, environnementaux et sociaux du dépistage et du diagnostic du SRAS-CoV-2 parmi les résidents de l'Ontario, au Canada. MÉTHODES: Nous avons exploré la présence potentielle de biais collisionneurs et caractérisé les déterminants individuels, environnementaux et sociaux de l'obtention d'un test de dépistage et d'un résultat positif à la présence de l'infection au SRAS-CoV-2 à l'aide d'analyses transversales parmi les 14,7 millions de personnes vivant dans la collectivité en Ontario, au Canada. Parmi les personnes ayant obtenu un diagnostic, nous avons utilisé des études analytiques distinctes afin de comparer les prédicteurs pour les personnes d'obtenir un résultat de test de dépistage positif plutôt que négatif, pour les personnes symptomatiques d'obtenir un résultat de test de dépistage positif plutôt que négatif et pour les personnes d'obtenir un résultat de test de dépistage positif plutôt que de ne pas obtenir un résultat positif (c.-à-d., obtenir un résultat de test de dépistage négatif ou ne pas obtenir de test de dépistage). Nos analyses comprennent des tests de dépistage réalisés entre le 1er mars et le 20 juin 2020. RÉSULTATS: Sur 14 695 579 personnes, nous avons constaté que 758 691 d'entre elles ont passé un test de dépistage du SRAS-CoV-2, parmi lesquelles 25 030 (3,3 %) ont obtenu un résultat positif. Plus la probabilité d'obtenir un test de dépistage s'éloignait de zéro, plus la variabilité généralement observée dans la probabilité d'un diagnostic était grande parmi les modèles d'études analytiques, particulièrement en ce qui a trait aux facteurs individuels. Nous avons constaté que la variabilité dans l'obtention d'un test de dépistage était moins importante en fonction des déterminants sociaux dans l'ensemble des études analytiques. Les facteurs tels que le fait d'habiter dans une région ayant une plus haute densité des ménages (rapport de cotes corrigé 1,86; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 % 1,75­1,98), une plus grande proportion de travailleurs essentiels (rapport de cotes corrigé 1,58; IC à 95 % 1,48­1,69), une population atteignant un plus faible niveau de scolarité (rapport de cotes corrigé 1,33; IC à 95 % 1,26­1,41) et une plus grande proportion d'immigrants récents (rapport de cotes corrigé 1,10; IC à 95 % 1,05­1,15), étaient systématiquement corrélés à une probabilité plus importante d'obtenir un diagnostic de SRAS-CoV-2, peu importe le modèle d'étude analytique employé. INTERPRÉTATION: Lorsque la capacité de dépister est limitée, nos résultats suggèrent que les facteurs de risque peuvent être estimés plus adéquatement en utilisant des comparateurs populationnels plutôt que des comparateurs de résultat négatif au test de dépistage. Optimiser la lutte contre la COVID-19 nécessite des investissements dans des interventions structurelles déployées de façon suffisante et adaptées à l'hétérogénéité des déterminants sociaux du risque, dont le surpeuplement des ménages, l'occupation professionnelle et le racisme structurel.

4.
Ann Epidemiol ; 65: 84-92, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525672

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Inequities in the burden of COVID-19 were observed early in Canada and around the world, suggesting economically marginalized communities faced disproportionate risks. However, there has been limited systematic assessment of how heterogeneity in risks has evolved in large urban centers over time. PURPOSE: To address this gap, we quantified the magnitude of risk heterogeneity in Toronto, Ontario from January to November 2020 using a retrospective, population-based observational study using surveillance data. METHODS: We generated epidemic curves by social determinants of health (SDOH) and crude Lorenz curves by neighbourhoods to visualize inequities in the distribution of COVID-19 and estimated Gini coefficients. We examined the correlation between SDOH using Pearson-correlation coefficients. RESULTS: Gini coefficient of cumulative cases by population size was 0.41 (95% confidence interval [CI]:0.36-0.47) and estimated for: household income (0.20, 95%CI: 0.14-0.28); visible minority (0.21, 95%CI:0.16-0.28); recent immigration (0.12, 95%CI:0.09-0.16); suitable housing (0.21, 95%CI:0.14-0.30); multigenerational households (0.19, 95%CI:0.15-0.23); and essential workers (0.28, 95%CI:0.23-0.34). CONCLUSIONS: There was rapid epidemiologic transition from higher- to lower-income neighborhoods with Lorenz curve transitioning from below to above the line of equality across SDOH. Moving forward necessitates integrating programs and policies addressing socioeconomic inequities and structural racism into COVID-19 prevention and vaccination programs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Geography , Humans , Ontario/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Socioeconomic Factors
5.
Am J Infect Control ; 49(11): 1429-1431, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1372866

ABSTRACT

In a multifacility prospective cohort study, we identified 116 acute care, 26 long-term care, and 67 rehabilitation patients who received direct care from a universally masked healthcare worker while communicable with COVID-19. Among 133(64%) patients with at least 14-day follow-up, 3 (2.3%, 95% CI, 0.77-6.4) became positive for SARS-CoV-2. Universal masking, embedded with other infection control practices, is associated with low risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from healthcare workers to patients and residents.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Health Personnel , Humans , Infection Control , Prospective Studies
6.
CMAJ ; 193(20): E723-E734, 2021 05 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1238783

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Optimizing the public health response to reduce the burden of COVID-19 necessitates characterizing population-level heterogeneity of risks for the disease. However, heterogeneity in SARS-CoV-2 testing may introduce biased estimates depending on analytic design. We aimed to explore the potential for collider bias in a large study of disease determinants, and evaluate individual, environmental and social determinants associated with SARS-CoV-2 testing and diagnosis among residents of Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We explored the potential for collider bias and characterized individual, environmental and social determinants of being tested and testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection using cross-sectional analyses among 14.7 million community-dwelling people in Ontario, Canada. Among those with a diagnosis, we used separate analytic designs to compare predictors of people testing positive versus negative; symptomatic people testing positive versus testing negative; and people testing positive versus people not testing positive (i.e., testing negative or not being tested). Our analyses included tests conducted between Mar. 1 and June 20, 2020. RESULTS: Of 14 695 579 people, we found that 758 691 were tested for SARS-CoV-2, of whom 25 030 (3.3%) had a positive test result. The further the odds of testing from the null, the more variability we generally observed in the odds of diagnosis across analytic design, particularly among individual factors. We found that there was less variability in testing by social determinants across analytic designs. Residing in areas with the highest household density (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.75-1.98), highest proportion of essential workers (adjusted OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.48-1.69), lowest educational attainment (adjusted OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.26-1.41) and highest proportion of recent immigrants (adjusted OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05-1.15) were consistently related to increased odds of SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis regardless of analytic design. INTERPRETATION: Where testing is limited, our results suggest that risk factors may be better estimated using population comparators rather than test-negative comparators. Optimizing COVID-19 responses necessitates investment in and sufficient coverage of structural interventions tailored to heterogeneity in social determinants of risk, including household crowding, occupation and structural racism.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Population Surveillance , RNA, Viral/analysis , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Social Determinants of Health/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Ontario/epidemiology , Young Adult
7.
CMAJ ; 193(20): E723-E734, 2021 05 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1206209

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Optimizing the public health response to reduce the burden of COVID-19 necessitates characterizing population-level heterogeneity of risks for the disease. However, heterogeneity in SARS-CoV-2 testing may introduce biased estimates depending on analytic design. We aimed to explore the potential for collider bias in a large study of disease determinants, and evaluate individual, environmental and social determinants associated with SARS-CoV-2 testing and diagnosis among residents of Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We explored the potential for collider bias and characterized individual, environmental and social determinants of being tested and testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection using cross-sectional analyses among 14.7 million community-dwelling people in Ontario, Canada. Among those with a diagnosis, we used separate analytic designs to compare predictors of people testing positive versus negative; symptomatic people testing positive versus testing negative; and people testing positive versus people not testing positive (i.e., testing negative or not being tested). Our analyses included tests conducted between Mar. 1 and June 20, 2020. RESULTS: Of 14 695 579 people, we found that 758 691 were tested for SARS-CoV-2, of whom 25 030 (3.3%) had a positive test result. The further the odds of testing from the null, the more variability we generally observed in the odds of diagnosis across analytic design, particularly among individual factors. We found that there was less variability in testing by social determinants across analytic designs. Residing in areas with the highest household density (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.75-1.98), highest proportion of essential workers (adjusted OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.48-1.69), lowest educational attainment (adjusted OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.26-1.41) and highest proportion of recent immigrants (adjusted OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05-1.15) were consistently related to increased odds of SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis regardless of analytic design. INTERPRETATION: Where testing is limited, our results suggest that risk factors may be better estimated using population comparators rather than test-negative comparators. Optimizing COVID-19 responses necessitates investment in and sufficient coverage of structural interventions tailored to heterogeneity in social determinants of risk, including household crowding, occupation and structural racism.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Population Surveillance , RNA, Viral/analysis , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Social Determinants of Health/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Ontario/epidemiology , Young Adult
9.
BMJ Open ; 11(3): e046282, 2021 03 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1189880

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The majority of patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 can be managed using virtual care. Dyspnoea is challenging to assess remotely, and the accuracy of subjective dyspnoea measures in capturing hypoxaemia have not been formally evaluated for COVID-19. We explored the accuracy of subjective dyspnoea in diagnosing hypoxaemia in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of consecutive outpatients with COVID-19 who met criteria for home oxygen saturation monitoring at a university-affiliated acute care hospital in Toronto, Canada from 3 April 2020 to 13 September 2020. Dyspnoea measures were treated as diagnostic tests, and we determined their sensitivity (SN), specificity (SP), negative/positive predictive value (NPV/PPV) and positive/negative likelihood ratios (+LR/-LR) for detecting hypoxaemia. In the primary analysis, hypoxaemia was defined by oxygen saturation <95%; the diagnostic accuracy of subjective dyspnoea was also assessed across a range of oxygen saturation cutoffs from 92% to 97%. RESULTS: During the study period, 89/501 (17.8%) of patients met criteria for home oxygen saturation monitoring, and of these 17/89 (19.1%) were diagnosed with hypoxaemia. The presence/absence of dyspnoea had limited accuracy for diagnosing hypoxaemia, with SN 47% (95% CI 24% to 72%), SP 80% (95% CI 68% to 88%), NPV 86% (95% CI 75% to 93%), PPV 36% (95% CI 18% to 59%), +LR 2.4 (95% CI 1.2 to 4.7) and -LR 0.7 (95% CI 0.4 to 1.1). The SN of dyspnoea was 50% (95% CI 19% to 81%) when a cut-off of <92% was used to define hypoxaemia. A modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea score >1 (SP 98%, 95% CI 88% to 100%), Roth maximal count <12 (SP 100%, 95% CI 75% to 100%) and Roth counting time <8 s (SP 93%, 95% CI 66% to 100%) had high SP that could be used to rule in hypoxaemia, but displayed low SN (≤50%). CONCLUSIONS: Subjective dyspnoea measures have inadequate accuracy for ruling out hypoxaemia in high-risk patients with COVID-19. Safe home management of patients with COVID-19 should incorporate home oxygenation saturation monitoring.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Canada , Dyspnea/diagnosis , Humans , Hypoxia/diagnosis , Outpatients , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity
10.
Trials ; 22(1): 224, 2021 Mar 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1147039

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is a well-established strategy for the prevention of infectious diseases, in which recently exposed people take a short course of medication to prevent infection. The primary objective of the COVID-19 Ring-based Prevention Trial with lopinavir/ritonavir (CORIPREV-LR) is to evaluate the efficacy of a 14-day course of oral lopinavir/ritonavir as PEP against COVID-19 among individuals with a high-risk exposure to a confirmed case. METHODS: This is an open-label, multicenter, 1:1 cluster-randomized trial of LPV/r 800/200 mg twice daily for 14 days (intervention arm) versus no intervention (control arm), using an adaptive approach to sample size calculation. Participants will be individuals aged > 6 months with a high-risk exposure to a confirmed COVID-19 case within the past 7 days. A combination of remote and in-person study visits at days 1, 7, 14, 35, and 90 includes comprehensive epidemiological, clinical, microbiologic, and serologic sampling. The primary outcome is microbiologically confirmed COVID-19 infection within 14 days after exposure, defined as a positive respiratory tract specimen for SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction. Secondary outcomes include safety, symptomatic COVID-19, seropositivity, hospitalization, respiratory failure requiring ventilator support, mortality, psychological impact, and health-related quality of life. Additional analyses will examine the impact of LPV/r on these outcomes in the subset of participants who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 at baseline. To detect a relative risk reduction of 40% with 80% power at α = 0.05, assuming the secondary attack rate in ring members (p0) = 15%, 5 contacts per case and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.05, we require 110 clusters per arm, or 220 clusters overall and approximately 1220 enrollees after accounting for 10% loss-to-follow-up. We will modify the sample size target after 60 clusters, based on preliminary estimates of p0, ICC, and cluster size and consider switching to an alternative drug after interim analyses and as new data emerges. The primary analysis will be a generalized linear mixed model with logit link to estimate the effect of LPV/r on the probability of infection. Participants who test positive at baseline will be excluded from the primary analysis but will be maintained for additional analyses to examine the impact of LPV/r on early treatment. DISCUSSION: Harnessing safe, existing drugs such as LPV/r as PEP could provide an important tool for control of the COVID-19 pandemic. Novel aspects of our design include the ring-based prevention approach, and the incorporation of remote strategies for conducting study visits and biospecimen collection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04321174 ) on March 25, 2020.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/prevention & control , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Post-Exposure Prophylaxis/methods , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , Drug Combinations , Hospitalization , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment Outcome
12.
J Immunol ; 206(1): 37-50, 2021 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-934539

ABSTRACT

There is a pressing need for an in-depth understanding of immunity to SARS-CoV-2. In this study, we investigated human T cell recall responses to fully glycosylated spike trimer, recombinant N protein, as well as to S, N, M, and E peptide pools in the early convalescent phase and compared them with influenza-specific memory responses from the same donors. All subjects showed SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses to at least one Ag. Both SARS-CoV-2-specific and influenza-specific CD4+ T cell responses were predominantly of the central memory phenotype; however SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ T cells exhibited a lower IFN-γ to TNF ratio compared with influenza-specific memory responses from the same donors, independent of disease severity. SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were less multifunctional than influenza-specific T cells, particularly in severe cases, potentially suggesting exhaustion. Most SARS-CoV-2-convalescent subjects also produced IFN-γ in response to seasonal OC43 S protein. We observed granzyme B+/IFN-γ+, CD4+, and CD8+ proliferative responses to peptide pools in most individuals, with CD4+ T cell responses predominating over CD8+ T cell responses. Peripheral T follicular helper (pTfh) responses to S or N strongly correlated with serum neutralization assays as well as receptor binding domain-specific IgA; however, the frequency of pTfh responses to SARS-CoV-2 was lower than the frequency of pTfh responses to influenza virus. Overall, T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 are robust; however, CD4+ Th1 responses predominate over CD8+ T cell responses, have a more inflammatory profile, and have a weaker pTfh response than the response to influenza virus within the same donors, potentially contributing to COVID-19 disease.


Subject(s)
Antigens, Viral/immunology , CD4-Positive T-Lymphocytes/immunology , Inflammation/immunology , Orthomyxoviridae/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
13.
JAMA Intern Med ; 181(2): 229-236, 2021 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-915097

ABSTRACT

Importance: Nursing home residents have been disproportionately affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Prevention recommendations emphasize frequent testing of health care personnel and residents, but additional strategies are needed. Objective: To develop a reproducible index of nursing home crowding and determine whether crowding was associated with COVID-19 cases and mortality in the first months of the COVID-19 epidemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based retrospective cohort study included more than 78 000 residents across more than 600 nursing homes in Ontario, Canada, and was conducted from March 29 to May 20, 2020. Exposures: The nursing home crowding index equaled the mean number of residents per bedroom and bathroom. Main Outcomes and Measures: The cumulative incidence of COVID-19 cases confirmed by a validated nucleic acid amplification assay and mortality per 100 residents; the introduction of COVID-19 into a home (≥1 resident case) was a negative tracer. Results: Of 623 homes in Ontario, we obtained complete information on 618 homes (99%) housing 78 607 residents (women, 54 160 [68.9%]; age ≥85 years, 42 919 [54.6%]). A total of 5218 residents (6.6%) developed COVID-19 infection, and 1452 (1.8%) died of COVID-19 infection as of May 20, 2020. COVID-19 infection was distributed unevenly across nursing homes; 4496 infections (86%) occurred in 63 homes (10%). The crowding index ranged across homes from 1.3 (mainly single-occupancy rooms) to 4.0 (exclusively quadruple occupancy rooms); 308 homes (50%) had a high crowding index (≥2). Incidence in high crowding index homes was 9.7% vs 4.5% in low crowding index homes (P < .001), while COVID-19 mortality was 2.7% vs 1.3%, respectively (P < .001). The likelihood of COVID-19 introduction did not differ (high = 31.3% vs low = 30.2%; P = .79). After adjustment for regional, nursing home, and resident covariates, the crowding index remained associated with an increased incidence of infection (relative risk [RR] = 1.73, 95% CI, 1.10-2.72) and mortality (RR, 1.69; 95% CI, 0.99-2.87). A propensity score analysis yielded similar conclusions for infection (RR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.30-3.38) and mortality (RR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.09-3.08). Simulations suggested that converting all 4-bed rooms to 2-bed rooms would have averted 998 COVID-19 cases (19.1%) and 263 deaths (18.1%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort of Canadian nursing homes, crowding was common and crowded homes were more likely to experience larger and deadlier COVID-19 outbreaks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Crowding , Nursing Homes , Aged, 80 and over , Disease Outbreaks , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Ontario/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
14.
CMAJ Open ; 8(4): E627-E636, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-840782

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Congregate settings have been disproportionately affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our objective was to compare testing for, diagnosis of and death after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection across 3 settings (residents of long-term care homes, people living in shelters and the rest of the population). METHODS: We conducted a population-based prospective cohort study involving individuals tested for SARS-CoV-2 in the Greater Toronto Area between Jan. 23, 2020, and May 20, 2020. We sourced person-level data from COVID-19 surveillance and reporting systems in Ontario. We calculated cumulatively diagnosed cases per capita, proportion tested, proportion tested positive and case-fatality proportion for each setting. We estimated the age- and sex-adjusted rate ratios associated with setting for test positivity and case fatality using quasi-Poisson regression. RESULTS: Over the study period, a total of 173 092 individuals were tested for and 16 490 individuals were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. We observed a shift in the proportion of cumulative cases from all cases being related to travel to cases in residents of long-term care homes (20.4% [3368/16 490]), shelters (2.3% [372/16 490]), other congregate settings (20.9% [3446/16 490]) and community settings (35.4% [5834/16 490]), with cumulative travel-related cases at 4.1% (674/16490). Cumulatively, compared with the rest of the population, the diagnosed cases per capita was 64-fold and 19-fold higher among long-term care home and shelter residents, respectively. By May 20, 2020, 76.3% (21 617/28 316) of long-term care home residents and 2.2% (150 077/6 808 890) of the rest of the population had been tested. After adjusting for age and sex, residents of long-term care homes were 2.4 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.2-2.7) times more likely to test positive, and those who received a diagnosis of COVID-19 were 1.4-fold (95% CI 1.1-1.8) more likely to die than the rest of the population. INTERPRETATION: Long-term care homes and shelters had disproportionate diagnosed cases per capita, and residents of long-term care homes diagnosed with COVID-19 had higher case fatality than the rest of the population. Heterogeneity across micro-epidemics among specific populations and settings may reflect underlying heterogeneity in transmission risks, necessitating setting-specific COVID-19 prevention and mitigation strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/transmission , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19 Testing/statistics & numerical data , Canada/epidemiology , Female , Homeless Persons/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Long-Term Care/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Prospective Studies , Travel/statistics & numerical data , Travel-Related Illness
15.
Trials ; 21(1): 647, 2020 Jul 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-647104

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Primary Objective: To determine if pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with 400mg hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), taken orally once daily reduces microbiologically confirmed COVID-19 among front line health care workers at high risk for SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Secondary Objectives: To compare the following between study arms: adverse events; symptomatic COVID-19; duration of symptomatic COVID-19; days hospitalized attributed to COVID-19; respiratory failure attributable to COVID-19 requiring i) non-invasive ventilation or ii) intubation/mechanical ventilation; mortality attributed to COVID-19, number of days unable to work attributed to COVID-19, seroconversion (COVID-19 negative to COVID-19 positive over the study period); ability of participant plasma to neutralize SARS-CoV-2 virus in vitro; To describe short-term psychological distress associated with risk of COVID-19 exposure at 1, 60, 120 days of the study. To explore laboratory markers within participants with confirmed COVID-19: including circulating markers of host immune and endothelial activation in participant plasma and their correlation with disease severity and outcome TRIAL DESIGN: The HEROS study is a two-arm, parallel-group, individually randomized (1:1 allocation ratio), placebo controlled, participant and investigator-blinded, multi-site superiority trial of oral HCQ 400 mg taken once daily for 90 days as PrEP to prevent COVID-19 in health care workers at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure. At 90 days, there is an open label extension wherein all participants are offered a one-month course of HCQ 400mg once daily for PrEP of COVID-19. PARTICIPANTS: Frontline HCWs aged 18 years of age or older, at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure (including staff of emergency departments, intensive care units, intubation teams, COVID-wards, and staff deployed to Long Term Care facilities) of five academic hospitals in downtown Toronto, Canada. Exclusion criteria include: currently pregnant, planning to become pregnant during the study period, and/or breast feeding; known hypersensitivity/allergy to hydroxychloroquine or to 4-aminoquinoline compounds; current use of hydroxychloroquine; known prolonged QT syndrome and/or baseline resting ECG with QTc>450 ms and/or concomitant medications which simultaneously may prolong the QTc that cannot be temporarily suspended/replaced; known pre-existing retinopathy, G6PD deficiency, porphyria, liver disease including cirrhosis, encephalopathy, hepatitis or alcoholism, diabetes on oral hypoglycemics or insulin, or renal insufficiency/failure; disclosure of self-administered use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine within 12 weeks prior to study; confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 at time of enrollment. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention: hydroxychloroquine, 400mg (2 tablets) orally per day. Comparator: placebo, two tablets visually identical to the intervention, orally per day MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is microbiologically confirmed COVID-19 (i.e. SARS-CoV-2 infection). This is a composite endpoint which includes positive results from any validated SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic assay including detection of viral RNA, and/or seroconversion. Participants will be assessed at baseline, and then undergo monthly follow-up at day 30, 60, and 90, 120. At each visit, participants will provide an oropharyngeal sample, blood sample, and will undergo electrocardiogram monitoring of the QTc interval. Secondary outcome measures include: adverse events; symptom duration of COVID-19; days of hospitalization attributed to COVID-19; respiratory failure requiring ventilator support attributed to COVID-19; mortality attributed to COVID-19; total days off work attributed to COVID-19; seropositivity (reactive serology by day 120); and short term psychological impact of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 at day 1, 60, 120 days using the K10, a validated measure of non-specific psychological distress. RANDOMISATION: Within each site, participants will be individually randomized to either the intervention arm with HCQ or the placebo arm using a fixed 1:1 allocation ratio using an interactive web-based response system to ensure concealment of allocation. Randomization schedules will be computer-generated and blocked using variable block sizes. BLINDING (MASKING): All participants, research coordinators, technicians, clinicians and investigators will be blinded to the participant allocation group. Numbers to be randomised (sample size) N=988, randomised into two groups of 494 patients. TRIAL STATUS: This summary describes protocol version No. 1.6, May 15, 2020. Recruitment is ongoing - started April 20, 2020 and anticipated end date is July 30, 2021 TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN.com Identifier: ISRCTN14326006, registered April 14, 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Health Personnel , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19 , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
17.
CMAJ Open ; 8(2): E407-E413, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-352370

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In patients who are discharged home to self-isolate while coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) test results are pending, there is no formal method for physician assessments or counselling to occur if the result returns positive. Our aim was to develop and test the feasibility of a virtual care program for self-isolating outpatients diagnosed with COVID-19. METHODS: In preparation for this gap in health care, the COVID-19 Expansion to Outpatients (COVIDEO) program was developed at the Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, to provide ongoing care for outpatients diagnosed with COVID-19. As part of a feasibility study, we describe our experiences with the first 50 patients managed using this program from its inception (Mar. 1, 2020) until Mar. 27, 2020. RESULTS: All 50 people who tested positive for COVID-19 at the Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and were discharged home to self-isolation during the study period were assessed through the COVIDEO program. Thirty-two patients (64%) were assessed via the Ontario Telemedicine Network virtual care platform, and the remainder by telephone. The median time from viral swab collection to first COVIDEO program assessment was 2 (interquartile range [IQR] 1-2) days. Among the 26 patients for whom further follow-up care through the COVIDEO program was discontinued by the end of March 2020, the median duration of virtual care was 12.5 (IQR 8.75-16) days. During the study period, 6 patients required transfer to hospital for assessment, of whom 4 required admission. INTERPRETATION: We have shown that a virtual care program can be used in the management of outpatients diagnosed with COVID-19. Further studies evaluating its sustainability and impact on health outcomes are underway.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Telemedicine/methods , Adult , Aftercare , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Disease Management , Feasibility Studies , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Ontario/epidemiology , Outpatients
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL