Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 8: 750650, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526771


We investigated racial disparities in a 30-day composite outcome of readmission and death among patients admitted across a 5-hospital health system following an index COVID-19 admission. A dataset of 1,174 patients admitted between March 1, 2020 and August 21, 2020 for COVID-19 was retrospectively analyzed for odds of readmission among Black patients compared to all other patients, with sequential adjustment for demographics, index admission characteristics, type of post-acute care, and comorbidities. Tabulated results demonstrated a significantly greater odds of 30-day readmission or death among Black patients (18.0% of Black patients vs. 11.3% of all other patients; Univariate Odds Ratio: 1.71, p = 0.002). Sequential adjustment via logistic regression revealed that the odds of 30-day readmission or death were significantly greater among Black patients after adjustment for demographics, index admission characteristics, and type of post-acute care, but not comorbidities. Stratification by type of post-acute care received on discharge revealed that the same disparity in odds of 30-day readmission or death existed among patients discharged home without home services, but not those discharged to home with home services or to a skilled nursing facility or acute rehab facility. Collectively, the findings suggest that weighing comorbidity burdens in post-acute care decisions may be relevant in addressing racial disparities in 30-day outcomes following discharge from an index COVID-19 admission.

BMC Cancer ; 21(1): 1094, 2021 Oct 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1463236


BACKGROUND: To ensure safe delivery of oncologic care during the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine has been rapidly adopted. However, little data exist on the impact of telemedicine on quality and accessibility of oncologic care. This study assessed whether conducting an office visit for thoracic oncology patients via telemedicine affected time to treatment initiation and accessibility. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with thoracic malignancies seen by a multidisciplinary team during the first surge of COVID-19 cases in Philadelphia (March 1 to June 30, 2020). Patients with an index visit for a new phase of care, defined as a new diagnosis, local recurrence, or newly discovered metastatic disease, were included. RESULTS: 240 distinct patients with thoracic malignancies were seen: 132 patients (55.0%) were seen initially in-person vs 108 (45.0%) via telemedicine. The majority of visits were for a diagnosis of a new thoracic cancer (87.5%). Among newly diagnosed patients referred to the thoracic oncology team, the median time from referral to initial visit was significantly shorter amongst the patients seen via telemedicine vs. in-person (median 5.0 vs. 6.5 days, p < 0.001). Patients received surgery (32.5%), radiation (24.2%), or systemic therapy (30.4%). Time from initial visit to treatment initiation by modality did not differ by telemedicine vs in-person: surgery (22 vs 16 days, p = 0.47), radiation (27.5 vs 27.5 days, p = 0.86, systemic therapy (15 vs 13 days, p = 0.45). CONCLUSIONS: Rapid adoption of telemedicine allowed timely delivery of oncologic care during the initial surge of the COVID19 pandemic by a thoracic oncology multi-disciplinary clinic.

COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Services Accessibility , Pandemics , Telemedicine/organization & administration , Thoracic Neoplasms/therapy , Time-to-Treatment , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Patient Care Team , Philadelphia/epidemiology , Quality of Health Care , Referral and Consultation , Retrospective Studies , Telemedicine/standards , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Thoracic Neoplasms/epidemiology , Thoracic Neoplasms/pathology , Time Factors
Infect Dis Ther ; 9(3): 435-449, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-381948


The emergence of SARS-CoV-2/2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) has created a global pandemic with no approved treatments or vaccines. Many treatments have already been administered to COVID-19 patients but have not been systematically evaluated. We performed a systematic literature review to identify all treatments reported to be administered to COVID-19 patients and to assess time to clinically meaningful response for treatments with sufficient data. We searched PubMed, BioRxiv, MedRxiv, and ChinaXiv for articles reporting treatments for COVID-19 patients published between 1 December 2019 and 27 March 2020. Data were analyzed descriptively. Of the 2706 articles identified, 155 studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 9152 patients. The cohort was 45.4% female and 98.3% hospitalized, and mean (SD) age was 44.4 years (SD 21.0). The most frequently administered drug classes were antivirals, antibiotics, and corticosteroids, and of the 115 reported drugs, the most frequently administered was combination lopinavir/ritonavir, which was associated with a time to clinically meaningful response (complete symptom resolution or hospital discharge) of 11.7 (1.09) days. There were insufficient data to compare across treatments. Many treatments have been administered to the first 9152 reported cases of COVID-19. These data serve as the basis for an open-source registry of all reported treatments given to COVID-19 patients at . Further work is needed to prioritize drugs for investigation in well-controlled clinical trials and treatment protocols.