ABSTRACT
Background: In 2020, a unique social experience was provided by the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Interventions to tackle the pandemic may affect the burden of other respiratory diseases. Objective: This study aims to assess the impact of the COVID-19 mitigation strategies on hospitalizations for asthma in children aged between 1 and 14 years, adults aged between 20 and 59 years, and elderly older than 60 years. Methods: Data from hospital admissions for asthma were obtained from the Department of Informatics of Brazilian Public Health System database in the period between January 2016 and December 2020 and analyzed by age groups. To evaluate the effect of containment measures on the incidence of asthma and respiratory system diseases (total), the absolute reduction and relative reduction were calculated by analyzing the subsets from 2016 to 2019 versus 2020. Results: There was a significant reduction in the average incidence of hospitalizations in 2020, with numbers ranging from -59% (incidence rate ratio, 0.41 [0.37-0.45]) for age 1 to 14 years (prepandemic 1,393.2/100,000 vs pandemic 574.9/100.000), -37% (incidence rate ratio, 0.63 [0.49-0.80]) for age 20 to 59 years (prepandemic 160.2/100,000 vs pandemic 101.1/100,000), and -60% (incidence rate ratio, 0.40 [0.33-0.47]) for older than 60 years (prepandemic 460.6/100,000 vs pandemic 185.3/100,000). Conclusions: Ashtma hospitalizations decreased in 2020, especially in the pediatric group and the older group during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may be associated with the reduction in the incidence of many respiratory viral infections.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To study associations between the Minnesota coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mitigation strategies on incidence rates of acute myocardial infarction (MI) or revascularization among residents of Southeast Minnesota. METHODS: Using the Rochester Epidemiology Project, all adult residents of a nine-county region of Southeast Minnesota who had an incident MI or revascularization between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, were identified. Events were defined as primary in-patient diagnosis of MI or undergoing revascularization. We estimated age- and sex-standardized incidence rates and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) stratified by key factors, comparing 2020 to 2015-2019. We also calculated IRRs by periods corresponding to Minnesota's COVID-19 mitigation timeline: "Pre-lockdown" (January 1-March 11, 2020), "First lockdown" (March 12-May 31, 2020), "Between lockdowns" (June 1-November 20, 2020), and "Second lockdown" (November 21-December 31, 2020). RESULTS: The incidence rate in 2020 was 32% lower than in 2015-2019 (24 vs 36 events/100,000 person-months; IRR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.62-0.74). Incidence rates were lower in 2020 versus 2015-2019 during the first lockdown (IRR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.44-0.66), in between lockdowns (IRR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61-0.79), and during the second lockdown (IRR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41-0.72). April had the lowest IRR (IRR 0.48; 95% CI, 0.34-0.68), followed by August (IRR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.40-0.76) and December (IRR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.41-0.77). Similar declines were observed across sex and all age groups, and in both urban and rural residents. CONCLUSION: Mitigation measures for COVID-19 were associated with a reduction in hospitalizations for acute MI and revascularization in Southeast Minnesota. The reduction was most pronounced during the lockdown periods but persisted between lockdowns.
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of measures designed to mitigate the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on worldwide cancer screening. We systematically searched PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and EMBASE without language restrictions for studies published between January 1, 2021, and February 10, 2021. Studies selected for full-text review contained data on patients screened for any type of cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic and comparison data from a time interval just prior to the pandemic. Data were obtained through dual extraction. All the included studies were assessed for quality and risk of bias. A meta-analysis was performed on 13 studies: 7 on screening mammography, 5 on colon cancer screening, and 3 on cervical cancer screening. Two of our studies reported on more than one type of cancer screening. The screening outcomes were reported as pooled incidence rate ratios using the inverse variance method and random effects models. All studies included in our meta-analysis reported the number of patients screened for cancer in defined time intervals before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that the pooled incidence rate ratios were significantly lower for screening during the COVID-19 pandemic for breast cancer (0.63; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.77; P<.001), colon cancer (0.11; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.24; P<.001), and cervical cancer (0.10; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.24; P<.001). These findings may add further morbidity and mortality to this public health crisis.