Predictors of Mortality Among Post-COVID-19 Discharged Patients in Northern India: A Case-Control Study.

Introduction The post-discharge all-cause mortality of COVID-19 disease is known, but predictors for the same have not been studied as much. The objective of this study was to develop an understanding of predictors of mortality to guide in prioritizing patient care and preventive approaches. Methods This current research is a single-center unmatched case-control study conducted at a tertiary care center in northern India, between April and September 2022. The data were extracted retrospectively from the hospital's electronic medical records of patients with the assistance of trained physicians using a standardized data extraction sheet. Results A total of 184 patients were enrolled and were segregated into two groups, cases and control, with 92 in each. The mean age of patients was 49.3 ± 17.53 years. The mortality group had a higher mean age (53.24 ± 18.53 yrs) as compared to the control group (45.37 ± 15.58 yrs, p=0.002). Bivariate analysis revealed a significant difference in the two groups with respect to O2 saturation at the time of admission (case - 91.12 ± 12.49 %, control - 95.46 ± 5.01 %, p=0.003); maximum O2 flow rate (L/min) (case - 11.01 ± 22.2, control - 6.41 ± 13.31, p=0.04); ICU need (p=0.005), cancer (p=0.001), O2 requirement at discharge (p=0.001) and acute kidney injury (AKI; p=0.007). On multiple regression analysis, cancer (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) - 2.469; 95% CI 1.183-5.150, p=0.016), ICU admission (aOR - 2.446; 95% CI 1.212-4.938, p=0.013), oxygen at discharge (aOR - 2.340; 95% CI 0.971-5.640, p=0.0586) and AKI (aOR - 5.6; 95% CI 2.351- 13.370, p=0.00) only found to be significant. Conclusion Among the patients released from the hospital post-COVID-19 treatment, the following aspects oxygen requirement (2.3 times), malignancy (2.4 times), ICU admission (2.4 times), and AKI (5.6 times) are risk factors of mortality. The presence of these variables would warrant a close follow-up for these patients in order to decrease post-COVID mortality.

Incidence and Characterization of Post-COVID-19 Symptoms in Hospitalized COVID-19 Survivors to Recognize Syndemic Connotations in India: Single-Center Prospective Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Long COVID, or post-COVID-19 syndrome, is the persistence of signs and symptoms that develop during or after COVID-19 infection for more than 12 weeks and are not explained by an alternative diagnosis. In spite of health care recouping to prepandemic states, the post-COVID-19 state tends to be less recognized from low- and middle-income country settings and holistic therapeutic protocols do not exist. Owing to the syndemic nature of COVID-19, it is important to characterize post-COVID-19 syndrome. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the incidence of post-COVID-19 symptoms in a cohort of inpatients who recovered from COVID-19 from February to July 2021 at a tertiary-care center in South India. In addition, we aimed at comparing the prevalence of post-COVID-19 manifestations in intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU patients, assessing the persistence, severity, and characteristics of post-COVID-19 manifestations, and elucidating the risk factors associated with the presence of post-COVID-19 manifestations. METHODS: A total of 120 adult patients admitted with COVID-19 in the specified time frame were recruited into the study after providing informed written consent. The cohort included 50 patients requiring intensive care and 70 patients without intensive care. The follow-up was conducted on the second and sixth weeks after discharge with a structured questionnaire. The questionnaire was filled in by the patient/family member of the patient during their visit to the hospital for follow-up at 2 weeks and through telephone follow-up at 6 weeks. RESULTS: The mean age of the cohort was 55 years and 55% were men. Only 5% of the cohort had taken the first dose of COVID-19 vaccination. Among the 120 patients, 58.3% had mild COVID-19 and 41.7% had moderate to severe COVID-19 infection. In addition, 60.8% (n=73) of patients had at least one persistent symptom at the sixth week of discharge and 50 (41.7%) patients required intensive care during their inpatient stay. The presence of persistent symptoms at 6 weeks was not associated with severity of illness, age, or requirement for intensive care. Fatigue was the most common reported persistent symptom with a prevalence of 55.8%, followed by dyspnea (20%) and weight loss (16.7%). Female sex (odds ratio [OR] 2.4, 95% CI 1.03-5.58; P=.04) and steroid administration during hospital stay (OR 4.43, 95% CI 1.9-10.28; P=.001) were found to be significant risk factors for the presence of post-COVID-19 symptoms at 6 weeks as revealed by logistic regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 60.8% of inpatients treated for COVID-19 had post-COVID-19 symptoms at 6 weeks postdischarge from the hospital. The incidence of post-COVID-19 syndrome in the cohort did not significantly differ across the mild, moderate, and severe COVID-19 severity categories. Female sex and steroid administration during the hospital stay were identified as predictors of the persistence of post-COVID-19 symptoms at 6 weeks.

The post-discharge coping difficulty of puerperal women in a middle and low-income tourist city during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic outbreak, the incidence of mental health problems in perinatal women has been high, and particularly prominent in China which was the first country affected by COVID-19. This paper aims to investigate the current situation and the related factors of maternal coping difficulties after discharge during COVID-19. METHODS: General information questionnaires (the Perinatal Maternal Health Literacy Scale, Postpartum Social Support Scale and Post-Discharge Coping Difficulty Scale-New Mother Form) were used to investigate 226 puerperal women in the third week of puerperium. The influencing factors were analyzed by single factor analysis, correlation and multiple linear regression. RESULTS: The total score of coping difficulties after discharge was 48.92 ± 12.05. At the third week after delivery, the scores of health literacy and social support were 21.34 ± 5.18 and 47.96 ± 12.71. There were negative correlations among health literacy, social support and coping difficulties after discharge (r = -0.34, r = -0.38, P < 0.001). Primipara, family income, health literacy and social support were the main factors influencing maternal coping difficulties after discharge. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, puerperal women in a low- and middle-income city had moderate coping difficulties after discharge and were affected by many factors. To meet the different needs of parturients and improve their psychological coping ability, medical staff should perform adequate assessment of social resources relevant to parturients and their families when they are discharged, so they can smoothly adapt to the role of mothers.

Utilization of telemedicine to provide post-discharge care: A comparison of pre-pandemic vs. pandemic care.

BACKGROUND: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, post-discharge virtual visits transitioned from a novel intervention to standard practice. Our aim was to evaluate participation in and outcomes of virtual post-discharge visits in the early-pandemic timeframe. METHODS: Pandemic cohort patients were compared to historical patients. Patient demographics, clinical information, and post-discharge 30-day hospital encounters were compared between groups. RESULTS: The historical cohort included 563 patients and the pandemic cohort had 823 patients. There was no difference in 30-day hospital encounters between patients who completed a video vs. telephone visit in the pandemic cohort (3.8% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.11). There was a lower 30-day hospital encounter rate in pandemic video and telephone visits compared to similar historical sub-groups. CONCLUSION: Expansion of virtual post-discharge visits to include all patients and telephone calls did not negatively impact rates of 30-day post-discharge hospital encounters. Offering telehealth options for post-discharge follow-up does not appear to have negative impact on healthcare utilization.

Stress Hyperglycemia, Diabetes Mellitus and COVID-19 Infection: Risk Factors, Clinical Outcomes and Post-Discharge Implications.

The novel severe acute respiratory distress syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused one of the most substantial pandemics that has affected humanity in the last century. At the time of the preparation of this review, it has caused the death of around 5 million people around the globe. There is ample evidence linking higher mortality risk rates from Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) with male gender, advancing age and comorbidities, such as obesity, arterial hypertension, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, and cancer. Hyperglycemia has been found to be accompanying COVID-19 not only in individuals with overt diabetes. Many authors claim that blood glucose levels should also be monitored in non-diabetic patients; moreover, it has been confirmed that hyperglycemia worsens the prognosis even without pre-existing diabetes. The pathophysiological mechanisms behind this phenomenon are complex, remain controversial, and are poorly understood. Hyperglycemia in the setting of COVID-19 could be a consequence of deterioration in pre-existing diabetes, new-onset diabetes, stress-induced or iatrogenic due to substantial usage of corticosteroids within the context of a severe COVID-19 infection. It is also plausible that it might be a result of adipose tissue dysfunction and insulin resistance. Last but not least, SARS-CoV-2 is also claimed to trigger sporadically direct ß-cell destruction and ß-cell autoimmunity. Pending further validations with longitudinal data are needed to legitimize COVID-19 as a potential risk factor for the development of diabetes. Hereby, we present an emphasized critical review of the available clinical data in an attempt to unravel the complex mechanisms behind hyperglycemia in COVID-19 infection. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate the bidirectional relationship between COVID-19 and diabetes mellitus. As the worldwide pandemic is still expanding, demand for answering these questions is arising. It will be of immense help for the management of COVID-19 patients, as well as for the implementation of post-discharge policies for patients with a high risk of developing diabetes.

The Role of Diabetes and Hyperglycemia on COVID-19 Infection Course-A Narrative Review.

It was previously reported that subjects with diabetes mellitus (DM) are more vulnerable to several bacterial or viral infections. In the era of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, it is reasonable to wonder whether DM is a risk factor for COVID-19 infection, too. It is not yet clear whether DM increases the risk for contracting COVID-19 infection or not. However, patients with DM when infected are more likely to develop severe or even fatal COVID-19 disease course than patients without DM. Certain characteristics of DM patients may also deteriorate prognosis. On the other hand, hyperglycemia per se is related to unfavorable outcomes, and the risk may be higher for COVID-19 subjects without pre-existing DM. In addition, individuals with DM may experience prolonged symptoms, need readmission, or develop complications such as mucormycosis long after recovery from COVID-19; close follow-up is hence necessary in some selected cases. We here present a narrative review of the literature in order to set light into the relationship between COVID-19 infection and DM/hyperglycemia.

Long-term follow-up and health-related quality of life in COVID-19 patients treated in hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the persistence of symptoms and health-related quality of life of coronavirus disease-2019 patients. METHODS: The cross-sectional study was conducted from April to September 2020 at Health Sciences University, Yedikule Chest Diseases Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey, and comprised patients of either gender who had to be hospitalised and treated for coronavirus disease-2019. Those who had spent <3 months (46-90 days) post-discharge formed Group 1, those having spent 3-6 were in Group 2, while those with >6 months post-discharge were in Group 3. Data was collected over the telephone Using the EuroQol's quality of life scale with 5 dimensions and 5 levels. The variables likely to affect the persistence of symptoms and the quality of life questionnaire scores were analysed using SPSS 16. RESULTS: Of the 225 subjects, 135(60%) were male and 90(40%) were female. The overall mean age was 55.7±19.91 years. There were 85(37.8%) participants in Group 1, 83(36.9%) in Group 2, and 57(25.3%) in Group 3. The age (p=0.09) and gender (p=0.23) distribution across the groups had no significant difference. Patients were called on an average 131.72±58.9 days after discharge (range: 46-279 days). Only 52 (23.1%) patients continued to show symptoms. Anxiety was the domain in which most patients 64(28.4%) reported deterioration. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients who have had coronavirus disease-2019COVID-19 after a long follow-up period did not show any symptoms or had any significant deterioration in their quality of life.

Readmissions, post-discharge mortality and sustained recovery among patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Many interventional in-patient COVID-19 trials assess primary outcomes through day 28 post-randomization. Since a proportion of patients experience protracted disease or relapse, such follow-up period may not fully capture the course of the disease, even when randomization occurs a few days after hospitalization. METHODS: Among adults hospitalized with COVID-19 in Eastern Denmark from March 18, 2020 - January 12, 2021 we assessed: all-cause mortality, recovery and sustained recovery 90 days after admission, and readmission and all-cause mortality 90 days after discharge. Recovery was defined as hospital discharge and sustained recovery as recovery and alive without readmissions for 14 consecutive days. RESULTS: Among 3,386 patients included in the study 2,796 (82.6%) reached recovery and 2,600 (77.0%) achieved sustained recovery. Of those discharged from hospital, 556 (19.9%) were readmitted, and 289 (10.3%) died. Overall, the median time to recovery was 6 days (Interquartile range (IQR), 3-10), and 19 days (IQR, 11-33) among patients in intensive care in the first two days of admission. CONCLUSIONS: Post-discharge readmission and mortality rates were substantial. Therefore, sustained recovery should be favored to recovery outcomes in clinical COVID-19 trials. A 28-day follow-up period may be too short the critically ill.

Proactive care post-discharge to reduce 30 day readmissions to hospital.

BACKGROUND: Healthwatch England estimated emergency readmissions have risen by 22.8% between 2012-13 and 2016-17. Some emergency readmissions could be avoided by providing patients with urgent out of hospital medical care or support. Sovereign Health Network (SHN) comprises of three GP practices, with a combined population of 38,000. OBJECTIVE: We will decrease the number of SHN patients readmitted within 30 days of discharge from Portsmouth Hospitals Trust following a non-elective admission (excluding Emergency Department attendance) by 40-60% by July 2020. METHODS: Four Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA) cycles were used to test the administrative and clinical processes. Our Advanced Nurse Practitioner reviewed all discharge summaries, added alerts to records, and proactively contacted patients either by text, telephone or home visit. RESULTS: 92 patients aged 23 days to 97 years were admitted onto the recent discharge scheme. Half of discharge summaries were received on the day of discharge, whilst 29% of discharge summaries were received more than 24 hours post-discharge, and one was received 11 days post-discharge. Following our interventions, there were 55% less than expected readmissions during the same time period. CONCLUSION: To allow proactive interventions to be instigated in a timely manner, discharge summaries need to be received promptly. The average readmission length of stay following a non-elective admission is seven days. Our proactive interventions saved approximately 102.9 bed days, with potential savings of 1,775 bed days over a year. We feel the results from our model are promising and could be replicated by other Primary Care Networks to result in larger savings in bed days.

Strengthening the Public Health Partnership and Telehealth Infrastructure to Reduce Health Care Disparities.

The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the urgency to focus on the essential value of public health systems (PHSs) in fostering health equity across the US health care delivery system. PHS integration and care coordination can be successfully achieved through health information technology systems. The objective of the study was to examine the association between PHS partnerships (PHSPs), telehealth postdischarge, and racial and ethnic disparities in health care. The analysis used 2017 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Medicare 100% inpatient claims data, the Medicare Beneficiary Summary File, the American Hospital Association Annual Survey, and the American Community Survey. Results showed that compared with those treated in hospitals with neither PHSP nor telehealth postdischarge services, beneficiaries treated in hospitals with PHSP encountered significantly lower Medicare payment and inpatient and readmission rates. Black patients experienced significantly lower cost, inpatient visits, and readmission rates when treated in hospitals with PHSP and telehealth postdischarge services (coefficient = -0.051, P < 0.001; incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.982, P = 0.007; IRR = 0.891, P = 0.003). The results of the study demonstrated the importance of combining PHSP and telehealth postdischarge services to improve the efficiency of the health care delivery system and health equity. It is urgent to ensure that PHSs have adequate funding and telehealth infrastructure to support population health.

Enriching the American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry Through Linkage With External Data Sources: Rationale and Design.

Background The AHA Registry (American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry) captures detailed information on hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The registry, however, does not capture information on social determinants of health or long-term outcomes. Here we describe the linkage of the AHA Registry with external data sources, including fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare claims, to fill these gaps and assess the representativeness of linked registry patients to the broader Medicare FFS population hospitalized with COVID-19. Methods and Results We linked AHA Registry records of adults ≥65 years from March 2020 to September 2021 with Medicare FFS claims using a deterministic linkage algorithm and with the American Hospital Association Annual Survey, Rural Urban Commuting Area codes, and the Social Vulnerability Index using hospital and geographic identifiers. We compared linked individuals with unlinked FFS beneficiaries hospitalized with COVID-19 to assess the representativeness of the AHA Registry. A total of 10 010 (47.0%) records in the AHA Registry were successfully linked to FFS Medicare claims. Linked and unlinked FFS beneficiaries were similar with respect to mean age (78.1 versus 77.9, absolute standardized difference [ASD] 0.03); female sex (48.3% versus 50.2%, ASD 0.04); Black race (15.1% versus 12.0%, ASD 0.09); dual-eligibility status (26.1% versus 23.2%, ASD 0.07); and comorbidity burden. Linked patients were more likely to live in the northeastern United States (35.7% versus 18.2%, ASD 0.40) and urban/metropolitan areas (83.9% versus 76.8%, ASD 0.18). There were also differences in hospital-level characteristics between cohorts. However, in-hospital outcomes were similar (mortality, 23.3% versus 20.1%, ASD 0.08; home discharge, 45.5% versus 50.7%, ASD 0.10; skilled nursing facility discharge, 24.4% versus 22.2%, ASD 0.05). Conclusions Linkage of the AHA Registry with external data sources such as Medicare FFS claims creates a unique and generalizable resource to evaluate long-term health outcomes after COVID-19 hospitalization.

Post-discharge early assessment with remote video link (PEARL) initiative for patients discharged from hospital medicine services.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted the availability and accessibility of outpatient care following hospital discharge. Hospitalists (physicians) and hospital medicine advanced practice providers (HM-APPs) coordinate discharge care of hospitalized patients; however, it is unknown if they can deliver post-discharge virtual care and overcome barriers to outpatient care. The objective was to develop and provide post-discharge virtual care for patients discharged from hospital medicine services. METHODS: We developed the Post-discharge Early Assessment with Remote video Link (PEARL) initiative for HM-APPs to conduct a post-discharge video visit (to review recommendations) and telephone follow-up (to evaluate adherence) with patients 2-6 days following hospital discharge. Participants included patients discharged from hospital medicine services at an institution's hospitals in Rochester (May 2020-August 2020) and Austin (November 2020-February 2021) in Minnesota, US. HM-APPs also interviewed patients about their experience with the video visit and completed a survey on their experience with PEARL. RESULTS: Of 386 eligible patients, 61.4% were enrolled (n = 237/386) including 48.1% women (n = 114/237). In patients with complete video visit and telephone follow-up (n = 141/237), most were prescribed new medications (83.7%) and took them as prescribed (93.2%). Among five classes of chronic medications, patient-reported adherence ranged from 59.2% (narcotics) to 91.5% (anti-hypertensives). Patient-reported self-management of 12 discharge recommendations ranged from 40% (smoking cessation) to 100% (checking rashes). Patients reported benefit from the video visit (agree: 77.3%) with an equivocal preference for video visits over clinic visits. Among HM-APPs who responded to the survey (88.2%; n = 15/17), 73.3% reported benefit from visual contact with patients but were uncertain if video visits would reduce emergency department visits. CONCLUSION: In this novel initiative, HM-APPs used video visits to provide care beyond their hospital role, reinforce discharge recommendations for patients, and reduce barriers to outpatient care. The effect of this initiative is under evaluation in a randomized controlled trial.

Venous and Arterial Thrombosis in Ambulatory and Discharged COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Introduction Venous and arterial thromboses are frequently observed complications in patients with severe novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection who require hospital admission. In this study, we evaluate the epidemiology of venous and arterial thrombosis events in ambulatory and postdischarge patients with COVID-19 infection. Materials and Method EMBASE and MEDLINE were searched up to July 21, 2021, in addition to other sources. We included studies that assessed the epidemiology of venous and arterial thrombosis events in ambulatory and postdischarge COVID-19 patients. Results A total of 16 studies (102,779 patients) were identified. The overall proportion of venous thromboembolic events in all patients, that is, ambulatory and postdischarge, was 0.80% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44-1.28), 0.28% (95% CI: 0.07-0.64), and 1.16% (95% CI: 0.69-1.74), respectively. Arterial events occurred in 0.75% (95% CI: 0.27-1.47) of all patients, 1.45% (95% CI: 1.10-1.86) of postdischarge patients, and 0.23% (95% CI: 0.019-0.66) of ambulatory patients. The pooled incidence rate estimates per 1,000 patient-days for VTE events were 0.06 (95% CI: 0.03-0.08) and 0.12 (95% CI: 0.07-0.19) for outpatients and postdischarge, respectively, whereas for arterial events were 0.10 (95% CI: 0-0.30) and 0.26 (95% CI: 0.16-0.37). Conclusion This study found a low risk of venous and arterial thrombi in ambulatory and postdischarge COVID-19 patients, with a higher risk in postdischarge patients compared with ambulatory patients. This suggests that regular universal thromboprophylaxis in these patient populations is probably not necessary.

Cardiovascular Biomarkers for Prediction of in-hospital and 1-Year Post-discharge Mortality in Patients With COVID-19 Pneumonia.

Aims: While COVID-19 affects the cardiovascular system, the potential clinical impact of cardiovascular biomarkers on predicting outcomes in COVID-19 patients is still unknown. Therefore, to investigate this issue we analyzed the prognostic potential of cardiac biomarkers on in-hospital and long-term post-discharge mortality of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods: Serum soluble ST2, VCAM-1, and hs-TnI were evaluated upon admission in 280 consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19-associated pneumonia in a single, tertiary care center. Patient clinical and laboratory characteristics and the concentration of biomarkers were correlated with in-hospital [Hospital stay: 11 days (10; 14)] and post-discharge all-cause mortality at 1 year follow-up [FU: 354 days (342; 361)]. Results: 11 patients died while hospitalized for COVID-19 (3.9%), and 11 patients died during the 1-year post-discharge follow-up period (n = 11, 4.1%). Using multivariate analysis, VCAM-1 was shown to predict mortality during the hospital period (HR 1.081, CI 95% 1.035;1.129, p = 0.017), but not ST2 or hs-TnI. In contrast, during one-year FU post hospital discharge, ST2 (HR 1.006, 95% CI 1.002;1.009, p < 0.001) and hs-TnI (HR 1.362, 95% CI 1.050;1.766, p = 0.024) predicted mortality, although not VCAM-1. Conclusion: In patients hospitalized with Covid-19 pneumonia, elevated levels of VCAM-1 at admission were associated with in-hospital mortality, while ST2 and hs-TnI might predict post-discharge mortality in long term follow-up.

Extended post-discharge thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

INTRODUCTION: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients, particularly those with high-risk features, are at risk for venous and arterial thromboembolic events for approximately 30 days or more after hospital discharge. Extended post-hospital discharge thromboprophylaxis has potential to reduce this risk. AREAS COVERED: Recent cohort, registry, and randomized trial data on the topic of extended post-discharge thromboprophylaxis in COVID-19 inpatients are reviewed, and key patient subgroups at high thrombotic risk are highlighted, with antithrombotic guidelines on the topic discussed. EXPERT OPINION: COVID-19 inpatients with cardiovascular risk factors, advanced age, intensive care unit stay, or an IMPROVE VTE score of 4 or more or a score of 2 or 3 plus elevated D-dimers (> twice the upper limit of normal) or an IMPROVE-DD VTE score of ≥4 are at high thrombotic risk in the post-discharge period. These high-risk patient subgroups benefit from extended post-discharge thromboprophylaxis, specifically with rivaroxaban 10 mg daily for 35 days. Recent NIH and ISTH guidelines recommend or suggest this approach. Results from other clinical trials are pending.

Listening to COVID-19 survivors: what they need after early discharge from hospital - a qualitative study.

PURPOSE: This study aims to explore the post-discharge experience and needs of COVID-19 survivors. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted. A total of 16 post-discharge COVID-19 patients aged 31-68 years were recruited. The semi-structured interviews were conducted by telephone one month after discharge and were analysed by Colaizzi's 7-step method. RESULTS: The post-discharge experience of COVID-19 patients were classified into four categories and ten subcategories. Category I: physiological problems consisted of physical sequelae (such as fatigue, shortness of breath, sleep disorder, chest pain) and a lack of physical rehabilitation guidance. Category II: psychological issues included anxiety, depression, fear, and psychological trauma. Category III: social issues included social stigma and financial stress. Category IV: positive experience and change included gratitude to social support and cherishing life and family. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 survivors urgently need guidance for physical rehabilitation and psychological growth, social support provisions, and protection from social stigma. The experience of COVID-19 survivors is significant for planning healthcare management systems and guiding public health prevention efforts.

Factors associated with readmission to the Emergency Department in a cohort of COVID-19 hospitalized patients

Introduction: The aim of this study was to describe the symptomatology and main factors associated with readmission to the Emergency Department (ED) in COVID-19 patients discharged from hospital during the first wave of the pandemic at the San Cecilio University Hospital, Granada, Spain. Methods: An observational longitudinal study was conducted in a cohort of 441 patients admitted to our hospital with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) from 1 March to 15 April 2020. Patients were followed up through medical records 6 months after discharge. Sociodemographic, clinical and symptomatologic variables were collected. Descriptive, bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. Results: The mean age of patients in the cohort was 66.4 years (s = 15.3), with 55.1% men. In-hospital mortality was 18.1%. The presence of persistent symptomatology was high (64.5%), especially respiratory (53.2%), systemic (46.3%) and neurological (31.0%). A total of 75 (20.8%) patients were readmitted to the ED during the 6 months following hospital discharge. The main factors associated with readmission to the ED were polymedication (P = 0.031), living in a care home (P = 0.014), fever (P = 0.047), general malaise (P < 0.001), thoracic pain (P < 0.001), headache (P = 0.012), hematological symptoms (P = 0.011), nephrological symptoms (P = 0.047), depressive symptoms (P = 0.009), syncope or hypotension (P = 0.006) and superinfection (P = 0.018). After multivariate adjustment analysis, thoracic pain (OR: 4.45, 95% CI: 1.88- 10.52), general malaise and hematological symptoms (OR: 3.95, 95% CI: 1.12-13.89) remained as risk factors. Conclusions: The presence of persistent symptomatology after hospital discharge in our cohort was common and varied. Polymedication and living in a care home made up the most vulnerable profile of COVID-19 patients for returning to the ED. Thoracic pain, general malaise and hematological symptoms were identified as potential markers of severity, along with others predictors. These findings might be useful for optimizing follow-up strategies. Future studies conducted in other geographical areas are necessary to corroborate our results. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Signa Vitae is the property of Pharmamed Mado Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Thrombotic and Hemorrhagic Incidences in Patients After Discharge from COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The association between coronavirus infection 2019 (COVID-19) and thrombosis has been explicitly shown through numerous reports that demonstrate high rates of thrombotic complications in infected patients. Recently, much evidence has shown that patients who survived COVID-19 might have a high thrombotic risk after hospital discharge. This current systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to better understand the incidence of thrombosis, bleeding, and mortality rates among patients discharged after COVID-19 hospitalization. METHODS: Using a search strategy that included terms for postdischarge, thrombosis, and COVID-19, 2 investigators independently searched for published articles indexed in the MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus databases that were published before August 2021. Pooled incidences and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model with a double arcsine transformation. RESULTS: Twenty articles were included in the meta-analysis. They provided a total of 19 461 patients discharged after COVID-19 hospitalization. The weighted pooled incidence of overall thrombosis among the patients was 1.3% (95 CI, 0. 6-2; I2 90.5), with a pooled incidence of venous thrombosis of 0.7% (95 CI, 0. 4-1; I2 73.9) and a pooled incidence of arterial thrombosis of 0.6% (95 CI, 0. 2-1; I2 88.1). The weighted pooled incidences of bleeding and mortality were 0.9% (95 CI, 0. 1-1.9; I2 95.1) and 2.8% (95 CI, 0. 6-5; I2 98.2), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The incidences of thrombosis and bleeding in patients discharged after COVID-19 hospitalization are comparable to those of medically ill patients.

Follow-Ups on Persistent Symptoms and Pulmonary Function Among Post-Acute COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: As the number of recovering COVID-19 patients increases worldwide, the persistence of symptoms and signs through the post-acute phase indicates an urgent need for prolonged follow-up care. To explore existing data about post-acute COVID-19 syndrome, this meta-analysis assesses the prevalence of persistent manifestations in multiple systems and abnormalities in lung function, as well as their related risks in patients with various severities. Methods: Articles about discharged COVID-19 patients (published from January 1, 2020 to February 23, 2021) were obtained by searching four databases. Cohort studies with follow-up periods >1 month post-discharge or >2 months post-admission were included. Results: A total of 4,478 COVID-19 patients from 16 cohort studies were included in this meta-analysis. Fatigue or weakness (47%) were the most prevalent physical effects of post-acute COVID-19 syndrome, while psychosocial (28%) symptoms were the most common manifestations among several systems. Abnormalities in lung function of recovering patients, i.e., DLCO <80% (47%, 95% CI: 32-61%) persisted for long periods. Severe patients were more likely to present joint pain (OR 1.84, 95% CI: 1.11-3.04) and decreased lung functions compared with non-severe patients, with pooled ORs for abnormal TLC, FEV1, FVC, and DLCO of 3.05 (95% CI: 1.88-4.96), 2.72 (95% CI: 1.31-5.63), 2.52 (95% CI: 1.28-4.98), and 1.82 (95% CI: 1.32-2.50), respectively. Conclusions: Our research indicates that patients recovering from COVID-19 manifest long-term, multi-system symptoms, and the adverse effects on psychosocial health and lung functions were the most extensive and persistent. These findings together may facilitate much needed in-depth study of clinical treatments for long-term, post-acute phase symptoms that affect a great number of recovering COVID-19 patients.

Association between post-hospital clinic and telephone follow-up provider visits with 30-day readmission risk in an integrated health system.

BACKGROUND: Follow-up visits with clinic providers after hospital discharge may not be feasible for some patients due to functional limitations, transportation challenges, need for physical distancing, or fear of exposure especially during the current COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The aim of the study was to determine the effects of post-hospital clinic (POSH) and telephone (TPOSH) follow-up provider visits versus no visit on 30-day readmission. We used a retrospective cohort design based on data from 1/1/2017 to 12/31/2019 on adult patients (n = 213,513) discharged home from 15 Kaiser Permanente Southern California hospitals. Completion of POSH or TPOSH provider visits within 7 days of discharge was the exposure and all-cause 30-day inpatient and observation stay readmission was the primary outcome. We used matching weights to balance the groups and Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard model to assess for readmission risk. RESULTS: Unweighted all-cause 30-day readmission rate was highest for patients who completed a TPOSH (17.3%) followed by no visit (14.2%), non-POSH (evaluation and management visits that were not focused on the hospitalization: 13.6%) and POSH (12.6%) visits. The matching weighted models showed that the effects of POSH and TPOSH visits varied across patient subgroups. For high risk (LACE 11+) medicine patients, both POSH (HR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.71, 0.85, P < .001) and TPOSH (HR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.83, 0.99, P = .03) were associated with 23 and 9% lower risk of 30-day readmission, respectively, compared to no visit. For medium to low risk medicine patients (LACE< 11) and all surgical patients regardless of LACE score or age, there were no significant associations for either visit type with risk of 30-day readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Post-hospital telephone follow-up provider visits had only modest effects on 30-day readmission in high-risk medicine patients compared to clinic visits. It remains to be determined if greater use and comfort with virtual visits by providers and patients as a result of the pandemic might improve the effectiveness of these encounters.