Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Hospital Readmissions: Patient Characteristics and Socioeconomic Factors Associated With Readmissions in an Urban Safety-Net Hospital System.

BACKGROUND: It is not yet known whether socioeconomic factors (ie, social determinants of health) are associated with readmission following hospitalization for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 6191 adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in a large New York City safety-net hospital system between March 1 and June 1, 2020. Associations between 30-day readmission and selected demographic characteristics, socioeconomic factors, prior health care utilization, and relevant features of the index hospitalization were analyzed using a multivariable generalized estimating equation model. RESULTS: The readmission rate was 7.3%, with a median of 7 days between discharge and readmission. The following were risk factors for readmission: age 65 and older [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.32; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13-1.55], history of homelessness, (aOR: 2.03 95% CI: 1.49-2.77), baseline coronary artery disease (aOR: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.34-2.10), congestive heart failure (aOR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.20-1.49), cancer (aOR: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.26-2.24), chronic kidney disease (aOR: 1.74; 95% CI: 1.46-2.07). Patients' sex, race/ethnicity, insurance, and presence of obesity were not associated with increased odds of readmission. A longer length of stay (aOR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.97-1.00) and use of noninvasive supplemental oxygen (aOR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.56-0.83) was associated with lower odds of readmission. Upon readmission, 18.4% of patients required intensive care, and 13.7% expired. CONCLUSION: We have found some factors associated with increased odds of readmission among patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Awareness of these risk factors, including patients' social determinants of health, may ultimately help to reduce readmission rates.

Validation of a Crisis Standards of Care Model for Prioritization of Limited Resources During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Crisis in an Urban, Safety-Net, Academic Medical Center.

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has overwhelmed healthcare resources even in wealthy nations, necessitating rationing of limited resources without previously established crisis standards of care protocols. In Massachusetts, triage guidelines were designed based on acute illness and chronic life-limiting conditions. In this study, we sought to retrospectively validate this protocol to cohorts of critically ill patients from our hospital. DESIGN: We applied our hospital-adopted guidelines, which defined severe and major chronic conditions as those associated with a greater than 50% likelihood of 1- and 5-year mortality, respectively, to a critically ill patient population. We investigated mortality for the same intervals. SETTING: An urban safety-net hospital ICU. PATIENTS: All adults hospitalized during April of 2015 and April 2019 identified through a clinical database search. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 365 admitted patients, 15.89% had one or more defined chronic life-limiting conditions. These patients had higher 1-year (46.55% vs 13.68%; p < 0.01) and 5-year (50.00% vs 17.22%; p < 0.01) mortality rates than those without underlying conditions. Irrespective of classification of disease severity, patients with metastatic cancer, congestive heart failure, end-stage renal disease, and neurodegenerative disease had greater than 50% 1-year mortality, whereas patients with chronic lung disease and cirrhosis had less than 50% 1-year mortality. Observed 1- and 5-year mortality for cirrhosis, heart failure, and metastatic cancer were more variable when subdivided into severe and major categories. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with major and severe chronic medical conditions overall had 46.55% and 50.00% mortality at 1 and 5 years, respectively. However, mortality varied between conditions. Our findings appear to support a crisis standards protocol which focuses on acute illness severity and only considers underlying conditions carrying a greater than 50% predicted likelihood of 1-year mortality. Modifications to the chronic lung disease, congestive heart failure, and cirrhosis criteria should be refined if they are to be included in future models.

Surgical oncology operative experience at a high-volume safety-net hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic led to disruptions in operative and hospital capabilities as the country triaged resources and canceled elective procedures. This study details the operative experience of a safety-net hospital for cancer-related operations during a 3-month period at the height of the pandemic. METHODS: Patients operated on for or diagnosed with malignancies of the abdomen, breast, skin, or soft-tissue (September 3, 2020-September 6, 2020) were identified from operative/clinic schedules. Sociodemographics, tumor and treatment characteristics, and COVID-19 information was identified through retrospective chart review of a prospectively maintained database. Descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS: Fifty patients evaluated within this window underwent oncologic surgery. Median age was 61 (interquartile range: 53-68), 56% were female, 86% were White, and 66% were Hispanic. The majority (28%) were for colon cancer. Only two patients tested positive for COVID-19 preoperatively or within 30 days of their operation. There were no mortalities during the 1-year study period. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, many hospitals and operative centers limited interventions to preserve resources, but oncologic procedures continued at many large-volume academic cancer centers. This study underscores the importance of continuing to offer surgery during the pandemic for surgical oncology cases at safety-net hospitals to minimize delays in time-sensitive oncologic treatment.

Characteristics and outcomes of cancer patients with covid-19 at a safety-net hospital.

Patients with cancer are a vulnerable population during the COVID-19 pandemic due to underlying immunosuppression, pre-existing comorbidities, and poor nutrition. There is a lack of data describing the disease course of cancer patients with COVID-19 disease. Therefore, we analyzed data from cancer patients with COVID-19 who were admitted to our hospital. Cancer patients were categorized into two groups as survivors and non-survivors of COVID-19. Among 68 cancer patients with COVID-19, 27% of patients were admitted to ICU, and 37% of the patients died. The median age was 72, and non-survivors were older than survivors (p = 0.001). Non-survivors had higher comorbidity scores, late-stage cancer, and worse ECOG performance status than survivors (all p values<0.005). Non-survivors also had significantly lower lymphocyte count and albumin level but higher lactate dehydrogenase, C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, troponin, and ferritin levels than survivors. On multivariable analysis, increased age and mechanical ventilation were associated with increased odds of death. We report no association between anti-cancer treatments and mortality from COVID-19 disease. In summary, cancer patients have higher mortality of COVID-19 infection than the general population. In addition to generally known risk factors, the high mortality rate in cancer patients with COVID-19 is associated with several cancer-specific factors.

Mother-Infant Dyads with COVID-19 at an Urban, Safety-Net Hospital: Clinical Manifestations and Birth Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe maternal characteristics and clinical outcomes of infants born to mothers with positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) tests during pregnancy at an urban, safety-net hospital in Boston. STUDY DESIGN: We abstracted electronic chart data from 75 pregnant women with positive SARS-CoV-2 tests at any stage of gestation until 72 hours after birth who delivered consecutively between March 31 and August 6, 2020 at our center. We collected clinical data on maternal and infant characteristics, including testing, signs, and symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), delivery outcomes, newborn care practices (skin-to-skin care, location of care, and breastfeeding) and 30-day postdischarge infant emergency room visits and readmissions. We described categorical characteristics as percentages for this case series. RESULTS: Among 75 pregnant women, 47 (63%) were Hispanic, 10 (13%) had hypertension, 23 (30%) had prepregnancy obesity, and 57 (76%) had symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Regarding birth outcomes, 32 (41%) had cesarean delivery and 14 (19%) had preterm birth. Among 75 infants, 5 (7%) had positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction tests in the first week of life, all of whom were born to Hispanic mothers with symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and had clinical courses consistent with gestational age. Six (8%) infants visited the emergency department within 30 days of discharge; one was admitted with a non-COVID-19 diagnosis. CONCLUSION: At our urban, safety-net hospital among pregnant women with positive SARS-CoV-2 tests, 41% had a cesarean delivery and 19% had a preterm birth. Seven percent of infants had one or more positive SARS-CoV-2 tests and all infants had clinical courses expected for gestational age. KEY POINTS: · Among 75 pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 positive testing at our center, five infants (7%) had one or more SARS-CoV-2 positive tests in the first week of life.. · Infants with positive SARS-CoV-2 tests had clinical courses expected for gestational age..

COVID-19 Pandemic and the Cholecystitis Experience at a Major Urban Safety-Net Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Acute cholecystitis is a common reason for emergency general surgery admission. The declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic may have resulted in treatment delays and corresponding increases in severity of disease. This study compared cholecystitis admissions and disease severity pre- and postdeclaration of pandemic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of adult acute cholecystitis admissions (January 1,2020-May 31, 2020). Corresponding time periods in 2018 and 2019 comprised the historical control. Difference-in-differences analysis compared biweekly cholecystitis admissions pre- and postdeclaration in 2020 to the historical control. Odds of increased severity of disease presentation were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Cholecystitis admissions decreased 48.7% from 5.2 to 2.67 cases (RR 0.51 [0.28,0.96], P = 0.04) following pandemic declaration when comparing 2020 to historical control (P = 0.02). After stratifying by severity, only Tokyo I admissions declined significantly postdeclaration (RR 0.42 [0.18,0.97]), when compared to historical control (P = 0.02). There was no change in odds of presenting with severe disease after the pandemic declaration (aOR 1.00 [95% CI 0.30, 3.38] P < 0.99) despite significantly longer lengths of symptoms reported in mild cases. CONCLUSIONS: Postpandemic declaration we experienced a significant decrease in cholecystitis admissions without corresponding increases in disease severity. The pandemic impacted healthcare-seeking behaviors, with fewer mild presentations. Given that the pandemic did not increase odds of presenting with increased severity of disease, our data suggests that not all mild cases of cholecystitis progress to worsening disease and some may resolve without medical or surgical intervention.

COVID-19: Exploring the Repercussions on Federally Qualified Health Center Service Delivery and Quality.

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about a precipitous transformation in health care delivery in the nation's safety-net, primary care system of federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). This study uses electronic health record data to quantify the extent of changes to visit volume in 36 FQHCs across 19 states as well as changes in quality metrics. We found a steep decline in in-person visits in March 2020 accompanied by a sharp increase in telehealth visits; however, combined volume remained 23% below pre-pandemic levels. The implications for public health are significant, as preventive and chronic care deferral could lead to exacerbations of health disparities. Our examination of the impact on quality measures suggests that gaps in care are already emerging. Services that cannot be readily performed virtually are most affected. As FQHC visit numbers recover, concerted efforts are needed to encourage access and re-engage at-risk groups that fell out of care.