Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 37
Filter
1.
Health Secur ; 20(S1): S4-S12, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2097251

ABSTRACT

The National Emerging Special Pathogens Training and Education Center (NETEC) was established in 2015 to improve the capabilities of healthcare facilities to provide safe and effective care to patients with Ebola and other special pathogens in the United States. Through NETEC, a collaborative network of 10 Regional Emerging Special Pathogen Treatment Centers (RESPTCs) undertook readiness activities that included potential respiratory pathogens. These preparations, which took place before the COVID-19 pandemic, established a foundation of readiness that enabled RESPTCs to play a pivotal role in the US COVID-19 pandemic response. As initial COVID-19 cases were detected in the United States, RESPTCs provided essential isolation capacity, supplies, and subject matter expertise that allowed for additional time for healthcare systems to prepare. Through the Special Pathogen Research Network, RESPTCs rapidly enrolled patients into early clinical trials. During periods of high community transmission, RESPTCs provided educational, clinical, and logistical support to a wide range of healthcare and nonhealthcare settings. In this article, we describe how NETEC and the RESPTC network leveraged this foundation of special pathogen readiness to strengthen the national healthcare system's response to the COVID-19 pandemic. NETEC and the RESPTC network have proven to be an effective model that can support the national response to future emerging special pathogens.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hemorrhagic Fever, Ebola , Humans , Infection Control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Isolation , United States/epidemiology
2.
Health Secur ; 20(S1): S54-S59, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2097248

ABSTRACT

Staff safety is paramount when managing an infectious disease event. However, early data from the COVID-19 pandemic suggested that staff compliance with personal protective equipment and other safety protocols was poor. In response to patient surges, many hospitals created dedicated "biomode" units to provide care for patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. To enhance staff safety on biomode units and during patient transports, our hospital created a safety officer/transport safety officer (SO/TSO) program. The first SOs/TSOs were nurses, clinical technicians, and other support staff who were redeployed from their home units when the units closed during the initial surge. During subsequent COVID-19 surges, dedicated SOs/TSOs were hired to maintain the program. SOs/TSOs provided just-in-time personal protective equipment training and helped staff safely enter and exit COVID-19 clinical units. SOs/TSOs participated in the transport of over 1,000 COVID-19 patients with no safety incidents reported. SOs/TSOs conducted safety audits throughout the hospital and observed 86% compliance with COVID-19 precautions across 32,500 activities. During contact tracing of frontline staff who became infected with SARS-CoV-2, potential deviations from COVID-19 precautions were identified in only 7.7% of cases. The SO/TSO program contributed to a culture of safety in the biomode units and helped to enhance infection prevention throughout the hospital. This program can serve as a model for other health systems during the response to the current pandemic and during future infectious disease threats.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/prevention & control , Hospitals , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Res Pract Thromb Haemost ; 6(5): e12753, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1935729

ABSTRACT

Background and Objectives: Current clinical guidelines recommend thromboprophylaxis for adults hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), yet it is unknown whether higher doses of thromboprophylaxis offer benefits beyond standard doses. Methods: We studied electronic health records from 50 091 adults hospitalized with COVID-19 in the United States between February 2020 and February 2021. We compared standard (enoxaparin 30 or 40 mg/day, fondaparinux 2.5 mg, or heparin 5000 units twice or thrice per day) versus intermediate (enoxaparin 30 or 40 mg twice daily, or up to 1.2 mg/kg of body weight daily, heparin 7500 units thrice per day or heparin 10 000 units twice or thrice per day) thromboprophylaxis. We separately examined risk of escalation to therapeutic anticoagulation, severe disease (first occurrence of high-flow nasal cannula, noninvasive positive pressure ventilation or invasive mechanical ventilation), and death. To summarize risk, we present hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using adjusted time-dependent Cox proportional hazards regression models. Results: People whose first dose was high intensity were younger, more often obese, and had greater oxygen support requirements. Intermediate dose thromboprophylaxis was associated with increased risk of therapeutic anticoagulation (HR, 3.39; 95% CI, 3.22-3.57), severe disease (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.17-1.28), and death (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.21-1.55). Increased risks associated with intermediate-dose thromboprophylaxis persisted in subgroup and sensitivity analyses varying populations and definitions of exposures, outcomes, and covariates. Conclusions: Our findings do not support routine use of intermediate-dose thromboprophylaxis to prevent clinical worsening, severe disease, or death among adults hospitalized with COVID-19.

4.
Crit Care Med ; 50(6): e592-e594, 2022 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1883055
5.
JAMA Intern Med ; 182(7): 730-738, 2022 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1872108

ABSTRACT

Importance: Pulse oximetry guides triage and therapy decisions for COVID-19. Whether reported racial inaccuracies in oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry are present in patients with COVID-19 and associated with treatment decisions is unknown. Objective: To determine whether there is differential inaccuracy of pulse oximetry by race or ethnicity among patients with COVID-19 and estimate the association of such inaccuracies with time to recognition of eligibility for oxygen threshold-specific COVID-19 therapies. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study of clinical data from 5 referral centers and community hospitals in the Johns Hopkins Health System included patients with COVID-19 who self-identified as Asian, Black, Hispanic, or White. Exposures: Concurrent measurements (within 10 minutes) of oxygen saturation levels in arterial blood (SaO2) and by pulse oximetry (SpO2). Main Outcomes and Measures: For patients with concurrent SpO2 and SaO2 measurements, the proportion with occult hypoxemia (SaO2<88% with concurrent SpO2 of 92%-96%) was compared by race and ethnicity, and a covariate-adjusted linear mixed-effects model was produced to estimate the association of race and ethnicity with SpO2 and SaO2 difference. This model was applied to identify a separate sample of patients with predicted SaO2 levels of 94% or less before an SpO2 level of 94% or less or oxygen treatment initiation. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate differences by race and ethnicity in time to recognition of eligibility for guideline-recommended COVID-19 therapies, defined as an SpO2 level of 94% or less or oxygen treatment initiation. The median delay among individuals who ultimately had recognition of eligibility was then compared. Results: Of 7126 patients with COVID-19, 1216 patients (63 Asian [5.2%], 478 Black [39.3%], 215 Hispanic [17.7%], and 460 White [37.8%] individuals; 507 women [41.7%]) had 32 282 concurrently measured SpO2 and SaO2. Occult hypoxemia occurred in 19 Asian (30.2%), 136 Black (28.5%), and 64 non-Black Hispanic (29.8%) patients compared with 79 White patients (17.2%). Compared with White patients, SpO2 overestimated SaO2 by an average of 1.7% among Asian (95% CI, 0.5%-3.0%), 1.2% among Black (95% CI, 0.6%-1.9%), and 1.1% among non-Black Hispanic patients (95% CI, 0.3%-1.9%). Separately, among 1903 patients with predicted SaO2 levels of 94% or less before an SpO2 level of 94% or less or oxygen treatment initiation, compared with White patients, Black patients had a 29% lower hazard (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.63-0.80), and non-Black Hispanic patients had a 23% lower hazard (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66-0.89) of treatment eligibility recognition. A total of 451 patients (23.7%) never had their treatment eligibility recognized, most of whom (247 [54.8%]) were Black. Among the remaining 1452 (76.3%) who had eventual recognition of treatment eligibility, Black patients had a median delay of 1.0 hour (95% CI, 0.23-1.9 hours; P = .01) longer than White patients. There was no significant median difference in delay between individuals of other racial and ethnic minority groups and White patients. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this cohort study suggest that racial and ethnic biases in pulse oximetry accuracy were associated with greater occult hypoxemia in Asian, Black, and non-Black Hispanic patients with COVID-19, which was associated with significantly delayed or unrecognized eligibility for COVID-19 therapies among Black and Hispanic patients. This disparity may contribute to worse outcomes among Black and Hispanic patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Ethnicity , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Hypoxia , Minority Groups , Oximetry/methods , Oxygen , Retrospective Studies
6.
JCI Insight ; 7(9)2022 05 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1765225

ABSTRACT

BackgroundSome clinical features of severe COVID-19 represent blood vessel damage induced by activation of host immune responses initiated by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. We hypothesized autoantibodies against angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), the SARS-CoV-2 receptor expressed on vascular endothelium, are generated during COVID-19 and are of mechanistic importance.MethodsIn an opportunity sample of 118 COVID-19 inpatients, autoantibodies recognizing ACE2 were detected by ELISA. Binding properties of anti-ACE2 IgM were analyzed via biolayer interferometry. Effects of anti-ACE2 IgM on complement activation and endothelial function were demonstrated in a tissue-engineered pulmonary microvessel model.ResultsAnti-ACE2 IgM (not IgG) autoantibodies were associated with severe COVID-19 and found in 18/66 (27.2%) patients with severe disease compared with 2/52 (3.8%) of patients with moderate disease (OR 9.38, 95% CI 2.38-42.0; P = 0.0009). Anti-ACE2 IgM autoantibodies were rare (2/50) in non-COVID-19 ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Unexpectedly, ACE2-reactive IgM autoantibodies in COVID-19 did not undergo class-switching to IgG and had apparent KD values of 5.6-21.7 nM, indicating they are T cell independent. Anti-ACE2 IgMs activated complement and initiated complement-binding and functional changes in endothelial cells in microvessels, suggesting they contribute to the angiocentric pathology of COVID-19.ConclusionWe identify anti-ACE2 IgM as a mechanism-based biomarker strongly associated with severe clinical outcomes in SARS-CoV-2 infection, which has therapeutic implications.FUNDINGBill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Gates Philanthropy Partners, Donald B. and Dorothy L. Stabler Foundation, and Jerome L. Greene Foundation; NIH R01 AR073208, R01 AR069569, Institutional Research and Academic Career Development Award (5K12GM123914-03), National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute R21HL145216, and Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship (DGE1746891).


Subject(s)
Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 , COVID-19 , Autoantibodies , Endothelial Cells , Humans , Immunoglobulin M , SARS-CoV-2
7.
Clin Infect Dis ; 75(1): e516-e524, 2022 08 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1746925

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need to understand the real-world effectiveness of remdesivir in the treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). METHODS: This was a retrospective comparative effectiveness study. Individuals hospitalized in a large private healthcare network in the United States from 23 February 2020 through 11 February 2021 with a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 and ICD-10 diagnosis codes consistent with symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were included. Remdesivir recipients were matched to controls using time-dependent propensity scores. The primary outcome was time to improvement with a secondary outcome of time to death. RESULTS: Of 96 859 COVID-19 patients, 42 473 (43.9%) received at least 1 remdesivir dose. The median age of remdesivir recipients was 65 years, 23 701 (55.8%) were male, and 22 819 (53.7%) were non-White. Matches were found for 18 328 patients (43.2%). Remdesivir recipients were significantly more likely to achieve clinical improvement by 28 days (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.22). Remdesivir patients on no oxygen (aHR 1.30, 95% CI, 1.22-1.38) or low-flow oxygen (aHR 1.23, 95% CI, 1.19-1.27) were significantly more likely to achieve clinical improvement by 28 days. There was no significant impact on the likelihood of mortality overall (aHR 1.02, 95% CI, .97-1.08). Remdesivir recipients on low-flow oxygen were significantly less likely to die than controls (aHR 0.85, 95% CI, .77-.92; 28-day mortality 8.4% [865 deaths] for remdesivir patients, 12.5% [1334 deaths] for controls). CONCLUSIONS: These results support the use of remdesivir for hospitalized COVID-19 patients on no or low-flow oxygen. Routine initiation of remdesivir in more severely ill patients is unlikely to be beneficial.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Adult , Aged , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
8.
Nature Machine Intelligence ; 3(3):184-186, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1655659

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted key challenges for patient care and health provider safety. Adaptable robotic systems, with enhanced sensing, manipulation and autonomy capabilities could help address these challenges in future infectious disease outbreaks.

9.
Lancet Rheumatol ; 4(1): e33-e41, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1591231

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Many individuals take long-term immunosuppressive medications. We evaluated whether these individuals have worse outcomes when hospitalised with COVID-19 compared with non-immunosuppressed individuals. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C), the largest longitudinal electronic health record repository of patients in hospital with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 in the USA, between Jan 1, 2020, and June 11, 2021, within 42 health systems. We compared adults with immunosuppressive medications used before admission to adults without long-term immunosuppression. We considered immunosuppression overall, as well as by 15 classes of medication and three broad indications for immunosuppressive medicines. We used Fine and Gray's proportional subdistribution hazards models to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) for the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation, with the competing risk of death. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate HRs for in-hospital death. Models were adjusted using doubly robust propensity score methodology. FINDINGS: Among 231 830 potentially eligible adults in the N3C repository who were admitted to hospital with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 during the study period, 222 575 met the inclusion criteria (mean age 59 years [SD 19]; 111 269 [50%] male). The most common comorbidities were diabetes (23%), pulmonary disease (17%), and renal disease (13%). 16 494 (7%) patients had long-term immunosuppression with medications for diverse conditions, including rheumatological disease (33%), solid organ transplant (26%), or cancer (22%). In the propensity score matched cohort (including 12 841 immunosuppressed patients and 29 386 non-immunosuppressed patients), immunosuppression was associated with a reduced risk of invasive ventilation (HR 0·89, 95% CI 0·83-0·96) and there was no overall association between long-term immunosuppression and the risk of in-hospital death. None of the 15 medication classes examined were associated with an increased risk of invasive mechanical ventilation. Although there was no statistically significant association between most drugs and in-hospital death, increases were found with rituximab for rheumatological disease (1·72, 1·10-2·69) and for cancer (2·57, 1·86-3·56). Results were generally consistent across subgroup analyses that considered race and ethnicity or sex, as well as across sensitivity analyses that varied exposure, covariate, and outcome definitions. INTERPRETATION: Among this cohort, with the exception of rituximab, there was no increased risk of mechanical ventilation or in-hospital death for the rheumatological, antineoplastic, or antimetabolite therapies examined. FUNDING: None.

10.
Am J Kidney Dis ; 79(2): 257-267.e1, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1575031

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and associated with poor outcomes. Urinary biomarkers have been associated with adverse kidney outcomes in other settings and may provide additional prognostic information in patients with COVID-19. We investigated the association between urinary biomarkers and adverse kidney outcomes among patients hospitalized with COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (n=153) at 2 academic medical centers between April and June 2020. EXPOSURE: 19 urinary biomarkers of injury, inflammation, and repair. OUTCOME: Composite of KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) stage 3 AKI, requirement for dialysis, or death within 60 days of hospital admission. We also compared various kidney biomarker levels in the setting of COVID-19 versus other common AKI settings. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Time-varying Cox proportional hazards regression to associate biomarker level with composite outcome. RESULTS: Out of 153 patients, 24 (15.7%) experienced the primary outcome. Twofold higher levels of neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) (HR, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.14-1.57]), monocyte chemoattractant protein (MCP-1) (HR, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.09-1.84]), and kidney injury molecule 1 (KIM-1) (HR, 2.03 [95% CI, 1.38-2.99]) were associated with highest risk of sustaining primary composite outcome. Higher epidermal growth factor (EGF) levels were associated with a lower risk of the primary outcome (HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.47-0.79]). Individual biomarkers provided moderate discrimination and biomarker combinations improved discrimination for the primary outcome. The degree of kidney injury by biomarker level in COVID-19 was comparable to other settings of clinical AKI. There was evidence of subclinical AKI in COVID-19 patients based on elevated injury biomarker level in patients without clinical AKI defined by serum creatinine. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size with low number of composite outcome events. CONCLUSIONS: Urinary biomarkers are associated with adverse kidney outcomes in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and may provide valuable information to monitor kidney disease progression and recovery.


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury , COVID-19 , Acute Kidney Injury/diagnosis , Acute Kidney Injury/epidemiology , Biomarkers , Creatinine , Humans , Lipocalin-2 , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Crit Care Med ; 50(3): e253-e262, 2022 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1511045

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: High-flow nasal cannula is widely used in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to coronavirus disease 2019, yet data regarding its effectiveness is lacking. More evidence is needed to guide patient selection, timing of high-flow nasal cannula initiation, and resource allocation. We aimed to assess time to discharge and time to death in severe coronavirus disease 2019 in patients treated with high-flow nasal cannula compared with matched controls. We also evaluated the ability of the respiratory rate-oxygenation ratio to predict progression to invasive mechanical ventilation. DESIGN: Time-dependent propensity score matching was used to create pairs of individuals who were then analyzed in a Cox proportional-hazards regression model to estimate high-flow nasal cannula's effect on time to discharge and time to death. A secondary analysis excluded high-flow nasal cannula patients intubated within 6 hours of admission. A Cox proportional-hazards regression model was used to assess risk of invasive mechanical ventilation among high-flow nasal cannula patients stratified by respiratory rate-oxygenation. SETTING: The five hospitals of the Johns Hopkins Health System. PATIENTS: All patients who were admitted with a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 were eligible for inclusion. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: High-flow nasal cannula was associated with longer median time to discharge: 10.6 days (interquartile range, 7.1-15.8 d) versus 7.8 days (interquartile range, 4.9-12.1 d). Respiratory rate-oxygenation index performed poorly in predicting ventilation or death. In the primary analysis, there was no significant association between high-flow nasal cannula and hazard of death (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.57-1.09). Excluding patients intubated within 6 hours of admission, high-flow nasal cannula was associated with reduced hazard of death (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.45-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Among unselected patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia, high-flow nasal cannula was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in hazard of death. However, in patients not mechanically ventilated within 6 hours of admission, high-flow nasal cannula was associated with a significantly reduced hazard of death.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Cannula/classification , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , Equipment Design , Female , Humans , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Selection , Proportional Hazards Models , Respiratory Rate , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Time Factors
13.
Ann Intern Med ; 174(10): 1395-1403, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1481181

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Relatively little is known about the use patterns of potential pharmacologic treatments of COVID-19 in the United States. OBJECTIVE: To use the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C), a large, multicenter, longitudinal cohort, to characterize the use of hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, and dexamethasone, overall as well as across individuals, health systems, and time. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: 43 health systems in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 137 870 adults hospitalized with COVID-19 between 1 February 2020 and 28 February 2021. MEASUREMENTS: Inpatient use of hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, or dexamethasone. RESULTS: Among 137 870 persons hospitalized with confirmed or suspected COVID-19, 8754 (6.3%) received hydroxychloroquine, 29 272 (21.2%) remdesivir, and 53 909 (39.1%) dexamethasone during the study period. Since the release of results from the RECOVERY (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy) trial in mid-June, approximately 78% to 84% of people who have had invasive mechanical ventilation have received dexamethasone or other glucocorticoids. The use of hydroxychloroquine increased during March 2020, peaking at 42%, and started declining by April 2020. By contrast, remdesivir and dexamethasone use gradually increased over the study period. Dexamethasone and remdesivir use varied substantially across health centers (intraclass correlation coefficient, 14.2% for dexamethasone and 84.6% for remdesivir). LIMITATION: Because most N3C data contributors are academic medical centers, findings may not reflect the experience of community hospitals. CONCLUSION: Dexamethasone, an evidence-based treatment of COVID-19, may be underused among persons who are mechanically ventilated. The use of remdesivir and dexamethasone varied across health systems, suggesting variation in patient case mix, drug access, treatment protocols, and quality of care. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; and National Institute on Aging.


Subject(s)
Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Dexamethasone/therapeutic use , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Alanine/therapeutic use , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , United States , Young Adult
15.
Am J Epidemiol ; 190(10): 2094-2106, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1447568

ABSTRACT

Longitudinal trajectories of vital signs and biomarkers during hospital admission of patients with COVID-19 remain poorly characterized despite their potential to provide critical insights about disease progression. We studied 1884 patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection from April 3, 2020, to June 25, 2020, within 1 Maryland hospital system and used a retrospective longitudinal framework with linear mixed-effects models to investigate relevant biomarker trajectories leading up to 3 critical outcomes: mechanical ventilation, discharge, and death. Trajectories of 4 vital signs (respiratory rate, ratio of oxygen saturation (Spo2) to fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio2), pulse, and temperature) and 4 laboratory values (C-reactive protein (CRP), absolute lymphocyte count (ALC), estimated glomerular filtration rate, and D-dimer) clearly distinguished the trajectories of patients with COVID-19. Before any ventilation, log(CRP), log(ALC), respiratory rate, and Spo2-to-Fio2 ratio trajectories diverge approximately 8-10 days before discharge or death. After ventilation, log(CRP), log(ALC), respiratory rate, Spo2-to-Fio2 ratio, and estimated glomerular filtration rate trajectories again diverge 10-20 days before death or discharge. Trajectories improved until discharge and remained unchanged or worsened until death. Our approach characterizes the distribution of biomarker trajectories leading up to competing outcomes of discharge versus death. Moving forward, this model can contribute to quantifying the joint probability of biomarkers and outcomes when provided clinical data up to a given moment.


Subject(s)
Biomarkers/metabolism , COVID-19/metabolism , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pneumonia, Viral/metabolism , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Case-Control Studies , Disease Progression , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Maryland/epidemiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Predictive Value of Tests , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Vital Signs
16.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 8(9): ofab448, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1443088

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Males experience increased severity of illness and mortality from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) compared with females, but the mechanisms of male susceptibility are unclear. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of SARS-CoV-2 testing and admission data at 5 hospitals in the Maryland/Washington DC area. Using age-stratified logistic regression models, we quantified the impact of male sex on the risk of the composite outcome of severe disease or death (World Health Organization score 5-8) and tested the impact of demographics, comorbidities, health behaviors, and laboratory inflammatory markers on the sex effect. RESULTS: Among 213 175 SARS-CoV-2 tests, despite similar positivity rates, males in age strata between 18 and 74 years were more frequently hospitalized. For the 2626 hospitalized individuals, clinical inflammatory markers (interleukin-6, C-reactive protein, ferritin, absolute lymphocyte count, and neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio) were more favorable for females than males (P < .001). Among 18-49-year-olds, male sex carried a higher risk of severe outcomes, both early (odds ratio [OR], 3.01; 95% CI, 1.75 to 5.18) and at peak illness during hospitalization (OR, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.78 to 3.74). Despite multiple differences in demographics, presentation features, comorbidities, and health behaviors, these variables did not change the association of male sex with severe disease. Only clinical inflammatory marker values modified the sex effect, reducing the OR for severe outcomes in males aged 18-49 years to 1.81 (95% CI, 1.00 to 3.26) early and 1.39 (95% CI, 0.93 to 2.08) at peak illness. CONCLUSIONS: Higher inflammatory laboratory test values were associated with increased risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 for males. A sex-specific inflammatory response to SARS-CoV-2 infection may underlie the sex differences in outcomes.

18.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(7): e2116901, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1306627

ABSTRACT

Importance: The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) is a centralized, harmonized, high-granularity electronic health record repository that is the largest, most representative COVID-19 cohort to date. This multicenter data set can support robust evidence-based development of predictive and diagnostic tools and inform clinical care and policy. Objectives: To evaluate COVID-19 severity and risk factors over time and assess the use of machine learning to predict clinical severity. Design, Setting, and Participants: In a retrospective cohort study of 1 926 526 US adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection (polymerase chain reaction >99% or antigen <1%) and adult patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection who served as controls from 34 medical centers nationwide between January 1, 2020, and December 7, 2020, patients were stratified using a World Health Organization COVID-19 severity scale and demographic characteristics. Differences between groups over time were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. Random forest and XGBoost models were used to predict severe clinical course (death, discharge to hospice, invasive ventilatory support, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient demographic characteristics and COVID-19 severity using the World Health Organization COVID-19 severity scale and differences between groups over time using multivariable logistic regression. Results: The cohort included 174 568 adults who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (mean [SD] age, 44.4 [18.6] years; 53.2% female) and 1 133 848 adult controls who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 (mean [SD] age, 49.5 [19.2] years; 57.1% female). Of the 174 568 adults with SARS-CoV-2, 32 472 (18.6%) were hospitalized, and 6565 (20.2%) of those had a severe clinical course (invasive ventilatory support, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, death, or discharge to hospice). Of the hospitalized patients, mortality was 11.6% overall and decreased from 16.4% in March to April 2020 to 8.6% in September to October 2020 (P = .002 for monthly trend). Using 64 inputs available on the first hospital day, this study predicted a severe clinical course using random forest and XGBoost models (area under the receiver operating curve = 0.87 for both) that were stable over time. The factor most strongly associated with clinical severity was pH; this result was consistent across machine learning methods. In a separate multivariable logistic regression model built for inference, age (odds ratio [OR], 1.03 per year; 95% CI, 1.03-1.04), male sex (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.51-1.69), liver disease (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.08-1.34), dementia (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.13-1.41), African American (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.05-1.20) and Asian (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.12-1.57) race, and obesity (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.27-1.46) were independently associated with higher clinical severity. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that COVID-19 mortality decreased over time during 2020 and that patient demographic characteristics and comorbidities were associated with higher clinical severity. The machine learning models accurately predicted ultimate clinical severity using commonly collected clinical data from the first 24 hours of a hospital admission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Databases, Factual , Forecasting , Hospitalization , Models, Biological , Severity of Illness Index , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/ethnology , COVID-19/mortality , Comorbidity , Ethnicity , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Female , Humans , Hydrogen-Ion Concentration , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , United States , Young Adult
19.
Front Cardiovasc Med ; 8: 667721, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1291179

ABSTRACT

Background: Although troponin elevation is common in COVID-19, the extent of myocardial dysfunction and its contributors to dysfunction are less well-characterized. We aimed to determine the prevalence of subclinical myocardial dysfunction and its association with mortality using speckle tracking echocardiography (STE), specifically global longitudinal strain (GLS) and myocardial work efficiency (MWE). We also tested the hypothesis that reduced myocardial function was associated with increased systemic inflammation in COVID-19. Methods and Results: We conducted a retrospective study of hospitalized COVID-19 patients undergoing echocardiography (n = 136), of whom 83 and 75 had GLS (abnormal >-16%) and MWE (abnormal <95%) assessed, respectively. We performed adjusted logistic regression to examine associations of GLS and MWE with in-hospital mortality. Patients were mean 62 ± 14 years old (58% men). While 81% had normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), prevalence of myocardial dysfunction was high by STE; [39/83 (47%) had abnormal GLS; 59/75 (79%) had abnormal MWE]. Higher MWE was associated with lower in-hospital mortality in unadjusted [OR 0.92 (95% CI 0.85-0.99); p = 0.048] and adjusted models [aOR 0.87 (95% CI 0.78-0.97); p = 0.009]. In addition, increased systemic inflammation measured by interleukin-6 level was associated with reduced MWE. Conclusions: Subclinical myocardial dysfunction is common in COVID-19 patients with clinical echocardiograms, even in those with normal LVEF. Reduced MWE is associated with higher interleukin-6 levels and increased in-hospital mortality. Non-invasive STE represents a readily available method to rapidly evaluate myocardial dysfunction in COVID-19 patients and can play an important role in risk stratification.

20.
Postgrad Med J ; 2021 May 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1247396

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 continues to be a major source of global morbidity and mortality. It abruptly stressed healthcare systems early in 2020 and the pressures continue. Devastating hardships have been endured by individuals, families and communities; the losses will be felt for years to come. As healthcare professionals and organisations stepped up to respond to the overwhelming number of cases, it is understandable that the focus has been primarily on coping with the quantity of the demand. During a pandemic, it is not surprising that few papers have drawn attention to the quality of the care delivered to those afflicted with illness. Despite the challenges, clinicians caring for patients with COVID-19 have risen to the occasion. This manuscript highlights aspirational examples from the published literature of thoughtful and superb care of patients with COVID-19 using an established framework for clinical excellence (formulated by the Miller-Coulson Academy of Clinical Excellence).

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL