Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Open Forum Infectious Diseases ; 9(Supplement 2):S730, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-2189878


Background. Classification of MIS-C, COVID-19, and other pediatric inflammatory conditions is challenged by phenotypic overlap and absence of diagnostic laboratory evidence. Due to public health need and based on limited data from early cases, CDC developed a necessarily broad MIS-C surveillance case definition in May 2020. Studies have since shown that some criteria do not distinguish between MIS-C and other conditions and may contribute to misclassification. To inform planned revision to the CDC definition, we evaluated the impact of narrowing these criteria on case inclusion in national MIS-C surveillance. Methods. Of state and local health-department reported cases meeting the current MIS-C case definition as of 04/14/2022, we describe the proportion that met revised criteria under consideration including fever duration, C-reactive protein (CRP) elevation using a defined cutoff, and organ involvement represented by specific criteria. We also evaluated cases identified using potential combinations of revised criteria. Results. Of 8,096 MIS-C cases fulfilling the original case definition, 6,332 (78%) had sufficient data for evaluation of criteria. Of these, 96% had fever for >=2 days and 94% had a CRP >= 3.0 mg/dL (Table 1). Cardiac involvement defined by key features of MIS-C was present in 84% of cases (62% if BNP/proBNP elevation was excluded);43% had shock. Dermatologic, gastrointestinal (GI) and hematologic involvement were present in 75%, 89% and 37% of cases, respectively. Neurologic (excluding headache), renal, and respiratory involvement were present in 16%, 20%, and 63% of cases, respectively. The number of cases with >= 2 of cardiac (without BNP/proBNP elevation), shock, dermatologic, GI, or hematologic involvement was 5,733 (91%). SARS-CoV-2 testing results are shown in Table 2. Conclusion. The CDC MIS-C case definition is intentionally broad. Using national surveillance data, we evaluated case inclusion under narrower criteria, prioritizing features of MIS-C that distinguish it from similar pediatric inflammatory conditions. A surveillance case definition may not capture all cases and is not intended to replace clinical judgment. We plan to assess additional criteria combinations, describe potentially excluded cases, and incorporate findings into a revised definition.

Journal of General Internal Medicine ; 37:S280, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1995854


BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected over 61 million U.S. citizens, and up to 30-80% of COVID-19 survivors may go on to develop post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC). These sequelae can be debilitating and often impair quality of life and daily function. Although it has been suggested that severity of acute COVID-19 infection is directly related to PASC development, this association remains unclear. METHODS: This prospective cohort study was conducted through consecutive recruitment of confirmed and probable COVID-19 patients with persistent symptoms lasting ≥3 weeks from disease onset or positive SARS-CoV-2 test from academic PASC clinics at Emory University and Grady Memorial Hospital in Atlanta, GA during January-December 2021. Sociodemographic, comorbidity, and acute COVID-19 data were collected. Severe acute COVID- 19 was defined as requiring hospitalization, and critical acute COVID-19 required intensive care. New or worsening symptoms persisting ≥3 weeks from COVID-19 onset were collected using a standardized review of systems, and confirmed by clinician interview. Differences in PASC symptom type were assessed by calculating risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the Taylor series, and difference in PASC duration was assessed using student's t-test. Two-tailed p-values ≤0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: Of 269 enrollees, median age was 52 years (range 18-93) and there were more women (74%) than men (26%). There were 152 (57%) African American, 76 (28%) White, and 21 (8%) Hispanic. Among PASC patients, the most common symptoms were dyspnea (68%), fatigue (63%), brain fog (48%), dizziness (27%), chest pain (25%), cough (23%) and headache (23%) with a median PASC duration of 132 days (range 21-523). Acute COVID-19 severity was asymptomatic in one participant, mild in 149 (55%), severe in 95 (35%), and critical in 23 (9%). Asymptomatic- mild acute COVID-19 patients had more persistent dyspnea (RR: 1.33, 95%, CI: 1.09- 1.61), fatigue (RR: 1.53, 95%CI: 1.22-1.91), brain fog (RR: 2.00, 95%CI: 1.44-2.67), dizziness (RR: 2.03, 95%CI: 1.27-3.25), and headache (RR: 2.07, 95%CI: 1.22-3.48) compared with severe-critical acute disease, who had a non-significant trend towards more cough and chest pain. Asymptomatic-mild participants were further from incident infection (153 days) compared to severe-critical participants (110 days) (p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to previous observations, COVID-19 survivors who experienced asymptomatic-mild infections may develop higher rates of prevalent PASC symptoms compared to those with severe- critical antecedent infections. These findings are not attributable to PASC duration, as longer PASC duration has been previously associated with fewer symptoms. To ensure early identification and linkage to specialized care, clinicians should be aware of PASC in patients with antecedent asymptomatic-mild acute COVID-19 infections.

Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences ; 30, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1397822


AimsBrief measurements of the subjective experience of stress with good predictive capability are important in a range of community mental health and research settings. The potential for large-scale implementation of such a measure for screening may facilitate early risk detection and intervention opportunities. Few such measures however have been developed and validated in epidemiological and longitudinal community samples. We designed a new single-item measure of the subjective level of stress (SLS-1) and tested its validity and ability to predict long-term mental health outcomes of up to 12 months through two separate studies.MethodsWe first examined the content and face validity of the SLS-1 with a panel consisting of mental health experts and laypersons. Two studies were conducted to examine its validity and predictive utility. In study 1, we tested the convergent and divergent validity as well as incremental validity of the SLS-1 in a large epidemiological sample of young people in Hong Kong (n = 1445). In study 2, in a consecutively recruited longitudinal community sample of young people (n = 258), we first performed the same procedures as in study 1 to ensure replicability of the findings. We then examined in this longitudinal sample the utility of the SLS-1 in predicting long-term depressive, anxiety and stress outcomes assessed at 3 months and 6 months (n = 182) and at 12 months (n = 84).ResultsThe SLS-1 demonstrated good content and face validity. Findings from the two studies showed that SLS-1 was moderately to strongly correlated with a range of mental health outcomes, including depressive, anxiety, stress and distress symptoms. We also demonstrated its ability to explain the variance explained in symptoms beyond other known personal and psychological factors. Using the longitudinal sample in study 2, we further showed the significant predictive capability of the SLS-1 for long-term symptom outcomes for up to 12 months even when accounting for demographic characteristics.ConclusionsThe findings altogether support the validity and predictive utility of the SLS-1 as a brief measure of stress with strong indications of both concurrent and long-term mental health outcomes. Given the value of brief measures of mental health risks at a population level, the SLS-1 may have potential for use as an early screening tool to inform early preventative intervention work.