Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 25
Filter
1.
Front Pediatr ; 10: 834875, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1834503

ABSTRACT

Background: Emerging evidence shows that both adults and children may develop post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC). The aim of this study is to characterise and compare long-term post-SARS-CoV-2 infection outcomes in adults and children in a defined region in Italy. Methods: A prospective cohort study including children (≤18 years old) with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and their household members. Participants were assessed via telephone and face-to-face visits up to 12 months post-SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis of household index case, using the ISARIC COVID-19 follow-up survey. Results: Of 507 participants from 201 households, 56.4% (286/507) were children, 43.6% (221/507) adults. SARS-CoV-2 positivity was 87% (249/286) in children, and 78% (172/221) in adults. The mean age of PCR positive children was 10.4 (SD = 4.5) and of PCR positive adults was 44.5 years (SD = 9.5), similar to the PCR negative control groups [children 10.5 years (SD = 3.24), adults 42.3 years (SD = 9.06)]. Median follow-up post-SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was 77 days (IQR 47-169). A significantly higher proportion of adults compared to children reported at least one persistent symptom (67%, 68/101 vs. 32%, 57/179, p < 0.001) at the first follow up. Adults had more frequently coexistence of several symptom categories at both follow-up time-points. Female gender was identified as a risk factor for PASC in adults (p 0.02 at 1-3 months and p 0.01 at 6-9 months follow up), but not in children. We found no significant correlation between adults and children symptoms. In the paediatric group, there was a significant difference in persisting symptoms between those with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to controls at 1-3 months follow up, but not at 6-9 months. Conversely, positive adults had a higher frequency of persisting symptoms at both follow-up assessments. Conclusion: Our data highlights that children can experience persistent multisystemic symptoms months after diagnosis of mild acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, although less frequently and less severely than co-habitant adults. There was no correlation between symptoms experienced by adults and children living in the same household. Our data highlights an urgent need for studies to characterise PASC in whole populations and the wider impact on families.

2.
Future Microbiol ; 17: 551-571, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1745178

ABSTRACT

There is limited evidence available on the long-term impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection in children. In this article, the authors analyze the recent evidence on pediatric long Covid and lessons learnt from a pediatric post-Covid unit in Rome, Italy. To gain a better understanding of the concerns raised by parents and physicians in relation to the potential long-term consequences of this novel infection, it is important to recognize that long-term effect of a post-infectious disease is not a new phenomenon.


The authors analyze the recent evidence on pediatric long Covid and lessons learnt from a pediatric post-Covid unit in Rome, Italy. Also, we analyze the long-term effects of other infectious diseases.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Diseases , COVID-19/complications , Child , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
3.
EuropePMC; 2022.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-329751

ABSTRACT

Background Post COVID-19 Condition (PCC) as defined by WHO refers to a wide range of new, returning, or ongoing health problems experienced by COVID-19 survivors, and represents a rapidly emerging public health priority. We aimed to establish how this developing condition has impacted patients in South Africa and which population groups are at risk. Methods In this prospective cohort study, participants ≥18 years who had been hospitalised with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection during the second and third wave between December 2020 and August 2021 underwent telephonic follow-up assessment up at one-month and three-months after hospital discharge. Participants were assessed using a standardised questionnaire for the evaluation of symptoms, functional status, health-related quality of life and occupational status. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine factors associated with PCC. Findings In total, 1,873 of 2,413 (78%) enrolled hospitalised COVID-19 participants were followed up at three-months after hospital discharge. Participants had a median age of 52 years (IQR 41-62) and 960 (51.3%) were women. At three-months follow-up, 1,249 (66.7%) participants reported one or more persistent COVID-related symptom(s), compared to 1,978/2,413 (82.1%) at one-month post-hospital discharge. The most common symptoms reported were fatigue (50.3%), shortness of breath (23.4%), confusion or lack of concentration (17.5%), headaches (13.8%) and problems seeing/blurred vision (10.1%). On multivariable analysis, factors associated with new or persistent symptoms following acute COVID-19 were age ≥65 years [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.62;95%confidence interval (CI) 1.00-2.61];female sex (aOR 2.00;95% CI 1.51-2.65);mixed ethnicity (aOR 2.15;95% CI 1.26-3.66) compared to black ethnicity;requiring supplemental oxygen during admission (aOR 1.44;95% CI 1.06-1.97);ICU admission (aOR 1.87;95% CI 1.36-2.57);pre-existing obesity (aOR 1.44;95% CI 1.09-1.91);and the presence of ≥4 acute symptoms (aOR 1.94;95% CI 1.19-3.15) compared to no symptoms at onset. Interpretation The majority of COVID-19 survivors in this cohort of previously hospitalised participants reported persistent symptoms at three-months from hospital discharge, as well as a significant impact of PCC on their functional and occupational status. The large burden of PCC symptoms identified in this study emphasises the need for a national health strategy. This should include the development of clinical guidelines and training of health care workers, in identifying, assessing and caring for patients affected by PCC, establishment of multidisciplinary national health services, and provision of information and support to people who suffer from PCC.

4.
BMC Med ; 20(1): 50, 2022 02 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1690914

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A substantial portion of people with COVID-19 subsequently experience lasting symptoms including fatigue, shortness of breath, and neurological complaints such as cognitive dysfunction many months after acute infection. Emerging evidence suggests that this condition, commonly referred to as long COVID but also known as post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) or post-COVID-19 condition, could become a significant global health burden. MAIN TEXT: While the number of studies investigating the post-COVID-19 condition is increasing, there is no agreement on how this new disease should be defined and diagnosed in clinical practice and what relevant outcomes to measure. There is an urgent need to optimise and standardise outcome measures for this important patient group both for clinical services and for research and to allow comparing and pooling of data. CONCLUSIONS: A Core Outcome Set for post-COVID-19 condition should be developed in the shortest time frame possible, for improvement in data quality, harmonisation, and comparability between different geographical locations. We call for a global initiative, involving all relevant partners, including, but not limited to, healthcare professionals, researchers, methodologists, patients, and caregivers. We urge coordinated actions aiming to develop a Core Outcome Set (COS) for post-COVID-19 condition in both the adult and paediatric populations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , COVID-19/complications , Child , Disease Progression , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Eur Respir J ; 59(2)2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1690989

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The long-term sequelae of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in children remain poorly characterised. This study aimed to assess long-term outcomes in children previously hospitalised with COVID-19 and associated risk factors. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study of children (≤18 years old) admitted to hospital with confirmed COVID-19. Children admitted between 2 April 2020 and 26 August 2020 were included. Telephone interviews used the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) COVID-19 Health and Wellbeing Follow-up Survey for Children. Persistent symptoms (>5 months) were further categorised by system(s) involved. RESULTS: 518 out of 853 (61%) eligible children were available for the follow-up assessment and included in the study. Median (interquartile range (IQR)) age was 10.4 (3-15.2) years and 270 (52.1%) were girls. Median (IQR) follow-up since hospital discharge was 256 (223-271) days. At the time of the follow-up interview 126 (24.3%) participants reported persistent symptoms, among which fatigue (53, 10.7%), sleep disturbance (36, 6.9%) and sensory problems (29, 5.6%) were the most common. Multiple symptoms were experienced by 44 (8.4%) participants. Risk factors for persistent symptoms were: older age "6-11 years" (OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.37-5.75) and "12-18 years" (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.41-5.4), and a history of allergic diseases (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.04-2.67). CONCLUSIONS: A quarter of children experienced persistent symptoms months after hospitalisation with acute COVID-19 infection, with almost one in 10 experiencing multisystem involvement. Older age and allergic diseases were associated with higher risk of persistent symptoms at follow-up.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adolescent , Aged , Child , Child, Hospitalized , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
6.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-320392

ABSTRACT

Background: Microbiological characterisation of co-infections and secondary infections in COVID-19 is lacking, while antimicrobial usage is high. We aimed to describe microbiologically-confirmed co-/secondary infections, and antimicrobial usage, in hospitalised patients with COVID-19.Methods: Hospitalised patients in England, Scotland, and Wales with confirmed/high likelihood SARS-CoV-2 infection were recruited to the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infections Consortium (ISARIC) WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK (CCP-UK) prospective cohort study. Patients admitted between 6th February–8th June 2020 with a recorded outcome 28 days after admission were included. Organisms considered clinically insignificant were excluded.Findings: Microbiological investigations were recorded for 8649/48 902 patients, with significant respiratory or bloodstream bacterial/fungal infections recorded for 1107 patients. These were mostly secondary infections diagnosed >2 days after admission (70·6%, 762/1080 with known sample timing). Staphylococcus aureus then Haemophilus influenzae were the most common pathogens causing respiratory co-infections (diagnosed ≤2 days after admission), with Enterobacteriaceae and S. aureus most common in secondary respiratory infections. Bloodstream infections were most frequently caused by Escherichia coli then S. aureus. Among patients with available data, 37·0% (13 390/36 145) received antimicrobials prior to admission and 85·2% (39 258/46 061) in hospital, highest in critical care. We identified frequent use of broad-spectrum agents and use of carbapenems over carbapenem-sparing alternatives.Interpretation: In hospitalised patients with COVID-19, microbiologically-confirmed bacterial/fungal infections are rare, and more likely to be secondary infections. Gram-negative organisms and S. aureus are the predominant pathogens. The frequency and nature of antimicrobial usage is concerning, but tractable targets for stewardship interventions exist.Funding: This work is supported by grants from: the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) [award CO-CIN-01], the Medical Research Council [grant MC_PC_19059] and by the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU)in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), in collaboration with Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and the University of Oxford [award 200907], NIHR HPRU in Respiratory Infections at Imperial College London with PHE [award 200927], Wellcome Trust and Department for International Development [215091/Z/18/Z], and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation[OPP1209135], and Liverpool Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre (Grant Reference: C18616/A25153), NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Imperial College London [IS-BRC-1215-20013], EU Platform foR European Preparedness Against (Re-) emerging Epidemics (PREPARE) [FP7 project 602525] and NIHR Clinical Research Network for providing infrastructure support for this research. LT is supported by a Wellcome Trust fellowship [205228/Z/16/Z]. PJMO is supported by a NIHR Senior Investigator Award [award 201385]. This research was funded in whole, or in part, by the Wellcome Trust. For the purpose of Open Access, the authors have applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the DHSC, DID, NIHR, MRC, Wellcome Trust or PHE.Conflict of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: support from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), the Medical Research Council (MRC), the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool, NIHR HPRU in Respiratory Infections at Imperial College London, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at ImperialCollege Lo don, and NIHR Clinical Research Network for the submitted work;ABD reports grants fromDepartment of Health and Social Care (DHSC), during the conduct of the study, grants from Wellcome Trust, outside the submitted work;PJMO reports personal fees from consultancies and from European RespiratorySociety, grants from MRC, MRC Global Challenge Research Fund, EU, NIHR BRC, MRC/GSK, WellcomeTrust, NIHR (Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Respiratory Infection), and is NIHR senior investigator outside the submitted work;his role as President of the British Society for Immunology was unpaid but travel and accommodation at some meetings was provided by the Society;JKB reports grants from MRC UK;MGS reportsgrants from DHSC NIHR UK, grants from MRC UK, grants from HPRU in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections,University of Liverpool, during the conduct of the study, other from Integrum Scientific LLC, Greensboro, NC, USA, outside the submitted work.Ethical Approval: Ethical approval was given by the South Central-Oxford C Research Ethics Committee in England (13/SC/0149), the Scotland A Research Ethics Committee (20/SS/0028), and the WHO Ethics Review Committee (RPC571 and RPC572, April 2013).

7.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-315550

ABSTRACT

Background: Clinical management guidelines (CMGs) can be useful tools to guide clinician’s decision making and enable consistent evidence-based high-quality care. Here, we assessed whether their objective quality has improved over time by considering CMGs for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and from different timepoints for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: We performed a rapid literature review, quality assessment and focus group consultation. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE-II) tool was used to evaluate the quality of the CMGs. In total, six COVID-19 treatments were selected to assess the responsiveness of a subset of guidelines and their updates to 20th November 2020. We ran two sessions of focus groups with patient advocates to elicit their views on guideline development. Results: : We included 37 COVID-19, six SARS, and four MERS CMGs. Evidence appraisals in CMGs generally focused on novel drugs rather than basic supportive care;where evidence for the latter was provided it was generally of a low quality. Most CMGs had major methodological flaws and there was no evidence of improvement in quality over time. CMGs scored lowest in the following AGREE-II domains: scope and purpose, editorial independence, stakeholder engagement, and rigour of development. Of the COVID-19 CMGs, only eight included specific guidance for the management of elderly patients and only ten for high-risk groups;a further eight did not specify the target patient group. Early in the pandemic, multiple guidelines recommended unproven treatments and whilst in general findings of major clinical trials were eventually adopted, this was not universally the case. Conclusions: : The quality of most CMGs produced in coronaviridae outbreaks is poor and we have found limited evidence of improvement over time, highlighting that current development frameworks must be improved. PROSPERO registration CRD42020167361 (17/02/2020)

8.
ProQuest Central;
Preprint in English | ProQuest Central | ID: ppcovidwho-328232

ABSTRACT

Although the majority of people with Covid-19 will experience mild to moderate symptoms and will recover fully, there is now increasing evidence that a significant proportion will experience persistent symptoms for months after the acute phase of the illness. These symptoms include, among others, fatigue, problems breathing, lack of smell and taste, headaches, and depression and anxiety. It is also clear the virus has lasting fluctuating multiorgan sequelae, including affecting not only the respiratory system but also the heart, liver, and nervous system. We present a protocol for a living systematic review that aims to synthesize the evidence on the prevalence and characteristics of post-acute COVID-19. The living systematic review will be updated regularly, approximately every 6 months, as new evidence emerges. We will include studies that follow up at least 100 people with Covid-19 at 12 or more weeks post Covid-19 onset, with no restrictions regarding country, setting, or language. We will use descriptive statistics and, for outcomes reported in two or more studies, we will use meta-analyses to estimate prevalence with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the exact method. Heterogeneity between estimates will be assessed using the I2 statistic. Our findings will also be presented as infographics to facilitate transcription to lay audiences. Ultimately, we aim to support the work of policy makers, practitioners, and patients when planning rehabilitation for those recovering from Covid-19. The protocol has been registered with PROSPERO (  CRD42020211131, 25/09/2020).

9.
Journal of the Intensive Care Society ; : 17511437211052226, 2021.
Article in English | Sage | ID: covidwho-1480400

ABSTRACT

Background:We aimed to compare the prevalence and severity of fatigue in survivors of Covid-19 versus non-Covid-19 critical illness, and to explore potential associations between baseline characteristics and worse recovery.Methods:We conducted a secondary analysis of two prospectively collected datasets. The population included was 92 patients who received invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) with Covid-19, and 240 patients who received IMV with non-Covid-19 illness before the pandemic. Follow-up data were collected post-hospital discharge using self-reported questionnaires. The main outcome measures were self-reported fatigue severity and the prevalence of severe fatigue (severity >7/10) 3 and 12-months post-hospital discharge.Results:Covid-19 IMV-patients were significantly younger with less prior comorbidity, and more males, than pre-pandemic IMV-patients. At 3-months, the prevalence (38.9% [7/18] vs. 27.1% [51/188]) and severity (median 5.5/10 vs 5.0/10) of fatigue were similar between the Covid-19 and pre-pandemic populations, respectively. At 6-months, the prevalence (10.3% [3/29] vs. 32.5% [54/166]) and severity (median 2.0/10 vs. 5.7/10) of fatigue were less in the Covid-19 cohort. In the total sample of IMV-patients included (i.e. all Covid-19 and pre-pandemic patients), having Covid-19 was significantly associated with less severe fatigue (severity <7/10) after adjusting for age, sex and prior comorbidity (adjusted OR 0.35 (95%CI 0.15?0.76, p=0.01).Conclusion:Fatigue may be less severe after Covid-19 than after other critical illness.

10.
BMJ Glob Health ; 6(9)2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1440817

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: While it is now apparent clinical sequelae (long COVID) may persist after acute COVID-19, their nature, frequency and aetiology are poorly characterised. This study aims to regularly synthesise evidence on long COVID characteristics, to help inform clinical management, rehabilitation strategies and interventional studies to improve long-term outcomes. METHODS: A living systematic review. Medline, CINAHL (EBSCO), Global Health (Ovid), WHO Global Research on COVID-19 database, LitCovid and Google Scholar were searched till 17 March 2021. Studies including at least 100 people with confirmed or clinically suspected COVID-19 at 12 weeks or more post onset were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the tool produced by Hoy et al. Results were analysed using descriptive statistics and meta-analyses to estimate prevalence. RESULTS: A total of 39 studies were included: 32 cohort, 6 cross-sectional and 1 case-control. Most showed high or moderate risk of bias. None were set in low-income countries and few included children. Studies reported on 10 951 people (48% female) in 12 countries. Most included previously hospitalised people (78%, 8520/10 951). The longest mean follow-up time was 221.7 (SD: 10.9) days post COVID-19 onset. Over 60 physical and psychological signs and symptoms with wide prevalence were reported, most commonly weakness (41%; 95% CI 25% to 59%), general malaise (33%; 95% CI 15% to 57%), fatigue (31%; 95% CI 24% to 39%), concentration impairment (26%; 95% CI 21% to 32%) and breathlessness (25%; 95% CI 18% to 34%). 37% (95% CI 18% to 60%) of patients reported reduced quality of life; 26% (10/39) of studies presented evidence of reduced pulmonary function. CONCLUSION: Long COVID is a complex condition with prolonged heterogeneous symptoms. The nature of studies precludes a precise case definition or risk evaluation. There is an urgent need for prospective, robust, standardised, controlled studies into aetiology, risk factors and biomarkers to characterise long COVID in different at-risk populations and settings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020211131.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Quality of Life , COVID-19/complications , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Clin Exp Allergy ; 51(9): 1107-1120, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1398367

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The long-term sequalae of COVID-19 remain poorly characterized. We assessed persistent symptoms in previously hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and assessed potential risk factors. METHODS: Data were collected from patients discharged from 4 hospitals in Moscow, Russia between 8 April and 10 July 2020. Participants were interviewed via telephone using an ISARIC Long-term Follow-up Study questionnaire. RESULTS: 2,649 of 4755 (56%) discharged patients were successfully evaluated, at median 218 (IQR 200, 236) days post-discharge. COVID-19 diagnosis was clinical in 1291 and molecular in 1358. Most cases were mild, but 902 (34%) required supplemental oxygen and 68 (2.6%) needed ventilatory support. Median age was 56 years (IQR 46, 66) and 1,353 (51.1%) were women. Persistent symptoms were reported by 1247 (47.1%) participants, with fatigue (21.2%), shortness of breath (14.5%) and forgetfulness (9.1%) the most common symptoms and chronic fatigue (25%) and respiratory (17.2%) the most common symptom categories. Female sex was associated with any persistent symptom category OR 1.83 (95% CI 1.55 to 2.17) with association being strongest for dermatological (3.26, 2.36 to 4.57) symptoms. Asthma and chronic pulmonary disease were not associated with persistent symptoms overall, but asthma was associated with neurological (1.95, 1.25 to 2.98) and mood and behavioural changes (2.02, 1.24 to 3.18), and chronic pulmonary disease was associated with chronic fatigue (1.68, 1.21 to 2.32). CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of adults admitted to hospital due to COVID-19 reported persistent symptoms 6 to 8 months after discharge. Fatigue and respiratory symptoms were most common, and female sex was associated with persistent symptoms.


Subject(s)
Aftercare , COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitalization , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Factors , Russia/epidemiology
12.
Lancet Reg Health Eur ; 8: 100186, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1397545

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This study sought to establish the long-term effects of Covid-19 following hospitalisation. METHODS: 327 hospitalised participants, with SARS-CoV-2 infection were recruited into a prospective multicentre cohort study at least 3 months post-discharge. The primary outcome was self-reported recovery at least ninety days after initial Covid-19 symptom onset. Secondary outcomes included new symptoms, disability (Washington group short scale), breathlessness (MRC Dyspnoea scale) and quality of life (EQ5D-5L). FINDINGS: 55% of participants reported not feeling fully recovered. 93% reported persistent symptoms, with fatigue the most common (83%), followed by breathlessness (54%). 47% reported an increase in MRC dyspnoea scale of at least one grade. New or worse disability was reported by 24% of participants. The EQ5D-5L summary index was significantly worse following acute illness (median difference 0.1 points on a scale of 0 to 1, IQR: -0.2 to 0.0). Females under the age of 50 years were five times less likely to report feeling recovered (adjusted OR 5.09, 95% CI 1.64 to 15.74), were more likely to have greater disability (adjusted OR 4.22, 95% CI 1.12 to 15.94), twice as likely to report worse fatigue (adjusted OR 2.06, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.31) and seven times more likely to become more breathless (adjusted OR 7.15, 95% CI 2.24 to 22.83) than men of the same age. INTERPRETATION: Survivors of Covid-19 experienced long-term symptoms, new disability, increased breathlessness, and reduced quality of life. These findings were present in young, previously healthy working age adults, and were most common in younger females. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research, UK Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, Department for International Development and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

13.
JAMA Pediatr ; 175(11): 1095-1096, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1335949
15.
Lancet ; 398(10296): 223-237, 2021 07 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1313499

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a multisystem disease and patients who survive might have in-hospital complications. These complications are likely to have important short-term and long-term consequences for patients, health-care utilisation, health-care system preparedness, and society amidst the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Our aim was to characterise the extent and effect of COVID-19 complications, particularly in those who survive, using the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK. METHODS: We did a prospective, multicentre cohort study in 302 UK health-care facilities. Adult patients aged 19 years or older, with confirmed or highly suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to COVID-19 were included in the study. The primary outcome of this study was the incidence of in-hospital complications, defined as organ-specific diagnoses occurring alone or in addition to any hallmarks of COVID-19 illness. We used multilevel logistic regression and survival models to explore associations between these outcomes and in-hospital complications, age, and pre-existing comorbidities. FINDINGS: Between Jan 17 and Aug 4, 2020, 80 388 patients were included in the study. Of the patients admitted to hospital for management of COVID-19, 49·7% (36 367 of 73 197) had at least one complication. The mean age of our cohort was 71·1 years (SD 18·7), with 56·0% (41 025 of 73 197) being male and 81·0% (59 289 of 73 197) having at least one comorbidity. Males and those aged older than 60 years were most likely to have a complication (aged ≥60 years: 54·5% [16 579 of 30 416] in males and 48·2% [11 707 of 24 288] in females; aged <60 years: 48·8% [5179 of 10 609] in males and 36·6% [2814 of 7689] in females). Renal (24·3%, 17 752 of 73 197), complex respiratory (18·4%, 13 486 of 73 197), and systemic (16·3%, 11 895 of 73 197) complications were the most frequent. Cardiovascular (12·3%, 8973 of 73 197), neurological (4·3%, 3115 of 73 197), and gastrointestinal or liver (0·8%, 7901 of 73 197) complications were also reported. INTERPRETATION: Complications and worse functional outcomes in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 are high, even in young, previously healthy individuals. Acute complications are associated with reduced ability to self-care at discharge, with neurological complications being associated with the worst functional outcomes. COVID-19 complications are likely to cause a substantial strain on health and social care in the coming years. These data will help in the design and provision of services aimed at the post-hospitalisation care of patients with COVID-19. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research and the UK Medical Research Council.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Clinical Protocols/standards , Comorbidity , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Age Factors , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases , Female , Hospitals , Humans , Male , Nervous System Diseases , Prospective Studies , Respiratory Tract Diseases , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom/epidemiology , World Health Organization
16.
Eur Respir J ; 59(2)2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1295412

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The long-term sequelae of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in children remain poorly characterised. This study aimed to assess long-term outcomes in children previously hospitalised with COVID-19 and associated risk factors. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study of children (≤18 years old) admitted to hospital with confirmed COVID-19. Children admitted between 2 April 2020 and 26 August 2020 were included. Telephone interviews used the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) COVID-19 Health and Wellbeing Follow-up Survey for Children. Persistent symptoms (>5 months) were further categorised by system(s) involved. RESULTS: 518 out of 853 (61%) eligible children were available for the follow-up assessment and included in the study. Median (interquartile range (IQR)) age was 10.4 (3-15.2) years and 270 (52.1%) were girls. Median (IQR) follow-up since hospital discharge was 256 (223-271) days. At the time of the follow-up interview 126 (24.3%) participants reported persistent symptoms, among which fatigue (53, 10.7%), sleep disturbance (36, 6.9%) and sensory problems (29, 5.6%) were the most common. Multiple symptoms were experienced by 44 (8.4%) participants. Risk factors for persistent symptoms were: older age "6-11 years" (OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.37-5.75) and "12-18 years" (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.41-5.4), and a history of allergic diseases (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.04-2.67). CONCLUSIONS: A quarter of children experienced persistent symptoms months after hospitalisation with acute COVID-19 infection, with almost one in 10 experiencing multisystem involvement. Older age and allergic diseases were associated with higher risk of persistent symptoms at follow-up.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adolescent , Aged , Child , Child, Hospitalized , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
17.
Lancet Microbe ; 2(8): e354-e365, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1253810

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Microbiological characterisation of co-infections and secondary infections in patients with COVID-19 is lacking, and antimicrobial use is high. We aimed to describe microbiologically confirmed co-infections and secondary infections, and antimicrobial use, in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. METHODS: The International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium (ISARIC) WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK (CCP-UK) study is an ongoing, prospective cohort study recruiting inpatients from 260 hospitals in England, Scotland, and Wales, conducted by the ISARIC Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium. Patients with a confirmed or clinician-defined high likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 infection were eligible for inclusion in the ISARIC WHO CCP-UK study. For this specific study, we excluded patients with a recorded negative SARS-CoV-2 test result and those without a recorded outcome at 28 days after admission. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, therapeutic, and outcome data were collected using a prespecified case report form. Organisms considered clinically insignificant were excluded. FINDINGS: We analysed data from 48 902 patients admitted to hospital between Feb 6 and June 8, 2020. The median patient age was 74 years (IQR 59-84) and 20 786 (42·6%) of 48 765 patients were female. Microbiological investigations were recorded for 8649 (17·7%) of 48 902 patients, with clinically significant COVID-19-related respiratory or bloodstream culture results recorded for 1107 patients. 762 (70·6%) of 1080 infections were secondary, occurring more than 2 days after hospital admission. Staphylococcus aureus and Haemophilus influenzae were the most common pathogens causing respiratory co-infections (diagnosed ≤2 days after admission), with Enterobacteriaceae and S aureus most common in secondary respiratory infections. Bloodstream infections were most frequently caused by Escherichia coli and S aureus. Among patients with available data, 13 390 (37·0%) of 36 145 had received antimicrobials in the community for this illness episode before hospital admission and 39 258 (85·2%) of 46 061 patients with inpatient antimicrobial data received one or more antimicrobials at some point during their admission (highest for patients in critical care). We identified frequent use of broad-spectrum agents and use of carbapenems rather than carbapenem-sparing alternatives. INTERPRETATION: In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, microbiologically confirmed bacterial infections are rare, and more likely to be secondary infections. Gram-negative organisms and S aureus are the predominant pathogens. The frequency and nature of antimicrobial use are concerning, but tractable targets for stewardship interventions exist. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), UK Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, UK Department for International Development, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, EU Platform for European Preparedness Against (Re-)emerging Epidemics, NIHR Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool, and NIHR HPRU in Respiratory Infections at Imperial College London.


Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents , COVID-19 , Coinfection , Respiratory Tract Infections , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , Coinfection/drug therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Prospective Studies , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom/epidemiology , World Health Organization
18.
PLoS One ; 16(5): e0251250, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1232461

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Clinical characterisation studies have been essential in helping inform research, diagnosis and clinical management efforts, particularly early in a pandemic. This systematic review summarises the early literature on clinical characteristics of patients admitted to hospital, and evaluates the quality of evidence produced during the initial stages of the pandemic. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and Global Health databases were searched for studies published from January 1st 2020 to April 28th 2020. Studies which reported on at least 100 hospitalised patients with Covid-19 of any age were included. Data on clinical characteristics were independently extracted by two review authors. Study design specific critical appraisal tools were used to evaluate included studies: the Newcastle Ottawa scale for cohort and cross sectional studies, Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for case series and the Cochrane collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. RESULTS: The search yielded 78 studies presenting data on 77,443 people. Most studies (82%) were conducted in China. No studies included patients from low- and middle-income countries. The overall quality of included studies was low to moderate, and the majority of studies did not include a control group. Fever and cough were the most commonly reported symptoms early in the pandemic. Laboratory and imaging findings were diverse with lymphocytopenia and ground glass opacities the most common findings respectively. Clinical data in children and vulnerable populations were limited. CONCLUSIONS: The early Covid-19 literature had moderate to high risk of bias and presented several methodological issues. Early clinical characterisation studies should aim to include different at-risk populations, including patients in non-hospital settings. Pandemic preparedness requires collection tools to ensure observational studies are methodologically robust and will help produce high-quality data early on in the pandemic to guide clinical practice and public health policy. REVIEW REGISTRATION: Available at https://osf.io/mpafn.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/pathology , C-Reactive Protein/analysis , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Cough/epidemiology , Cough/etiology , Databases, Factual , Fever/epidemiology , Fever/etiology , Headache/epidemiology , Headache/etiology , Humans , Lymphopenia/etiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
19.
BMJ Open ; 11(3): e043887, 2021 03 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1127585

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Very little is known about possible clinical sequelae that may persist after resolution of acute COVID-19. A recent longitudinal cohort from Italy including 143 patients followed up after hospitalisation with COVID-19 reported that 87% had at least one ongoing symptom at 60-day follow-up. Early indications suggest that patients with COVID-19 may need even more psychological support than typical intensive care unit patients. The assessment of risk factors for longer term consequences requires a longitudinal study linked to data on pre-existing conditions and care received during the acute phase of illness. The primary aim of this study is to characterise physical and psychosocial sequelae in patients post-COVID-19 hospital discharge. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is an international open-access prospective, observational multisite study. This protocol is linked with the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) and the WHO's Clinical Characterisation Protocol, which includes patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 during hospitalisation. This protocol will follow-up a subset of patients with confirmed COVID-19 using standardised surveys to measure longer term physical and psychosocial sequelae. The data will be linked with the acute phase data. Statistical analyses will be undertaken to characterise groups most likely to be affected by sequelae of COVID-19. The open-access follow-up survey can be used as a data collection tool by other follow-up studies, to facilitate data harmonisation and to identify subsets of patients for further in-depth follow-up. The outcomes of this study will inform strategies to prevent long-term consequences; inform clinical management, interventional studies, rehabilitation and public health management to reduce overall morbidity; and improve long-term outcomes of COVID-19. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol and survey are open access to enable low-resourced sites to join the study to facilitate global standardised, longitudinal data collection. Ethical approval has been given by sites in Colombia, Ghana, Italy, Norway, Russia, the UK and South Africa. New sites are welcome to join this collaborative study at any time. Sites interested in adopting the protocol as it is or in an adapted version are responsible for ensuring that local sponsorship and ethical approvals in place as appropriate. The tools are available on the ISARIC website (www.isaric.org). PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: osf.io/c5rw3/ PROTOCOL VERSION: 3 August 2020 EUROQOL ID: 37035.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/psychology , Colombia , Ghana , Humans , Italy , Longitudinal Studies , Norway , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , Russia , South Africa , United Kingdom
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL