Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 868
Filter
1.
BMJ Open Qual ; 12(2)2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20241465

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Medication reconciliation (MedRec) is a process where providers work with patients to document and communicate comprehensive medication information by creating a complete medication list (best possible medication history (BPMH)) then reconciling it against what patient is actually taking to identify potential issues such as drug-drug interactions. We undertook an environmental scan of current MedRec practices in outpatient cancer care to inform a quality improvement project at our centre with the aim of 30% of patients having a BPMH or MedRec within 30 days of initiating treatment with systemic therapy. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders from 21 cancer centres across Canada, probing on current policies, and barriers and facilitators to MedRec. Guided by the findings of the scan, we then undertook a quality improvement project at our cancer centre, comprising six iterative improvement cycles. RESULTS: Most institutions interviewed had a process in place for collecting a BPMH (81%) and targeted patients initiating systemic therapy (59%); however, considerable practice variation was noted and completion of full MedRec was uncommon. Lack of resources, high patient volumes, lack of a common medical record spanning institutions and settings which limits access to medication records from external institutions and community pharmacies were identified as significant barriers. Despite navigating challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic, we achieved 26.6% of eligible patients with a documented BPMH. However, uptake of full MedRec remained low whereby 4.7% of patients had a documented MedRec. CONCLUSIONS: Realising improvements to completion of MedRec in outpatient cancer care is possible but takes considerable time and iteration as the process is complex. Resource allocation and information sharing remain major barriers which need to be addressed in order to observe meaningful improvements in MedRec.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Humans , Medication Reconciliation , Outpatients , Pandemics , Electronic Health Records , Neoplasms/drug therapy
2.
Am J Gastroenterol ; 118(6): 1069-1079, 2023 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20239981

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Acute infectious gastroenteritis (AGE) is a common reason for outpatient visits and hospitalizations in the United States. This study aimed to understand the demographic and clinical characteristics, common pathogens detected, health care resource utilization (HRU), and cost among adult outpatients with AGE visiting US health systems. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using one of the largest hospital discharge databases (PINC AI Healthcare Database) in the United States. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with a principal diagnosis of AGE during an outpatient visit between January 1, 2016, and June 30, 2021, were included. Pathogen detection analysis was performed in those with microbiology data available. RESULTS: Among 248,896 patients, the mean age was 44.3 years (range 18-89+ years), 62.9% were female, and 68.5% were White. More than half (62.0%) of the patients did not have any preexisting comorbidity, and only 18.3% underwent stool workup at the hospital. Most patients (84.7%) were seen in the emergency department, and most (96.4%) were discharged home. Within 30 days of discharge, 1.0% were hospitalized, and 2.8% had another outpatient visit due to AGE. The mean cost of the index visit plus 30-day AGE-related follow-up was $1,338 per patient, amounting to $333,060,182 for the total study population. Among patients with microbiology data available (n = 12,469), common pathogens detected were Clostridioides difficile (32.2%), norovirus (6.3%), and Campylobacter spp. (4.0%). DISCUSSION: AGE is a common and costly disease affecting adults of all ages and more females than males, including individuals with or without baseline conditions in a hospital-based outpatient setting. C. difficile was the most common pathogen detected.


Subject(s)
Clostridioides difficile , Gastroenteritis , Male , Adult , Humans , Female , United States/epidemiology , Adolescent , Young Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Outpatients , Retrospective Studies , Financial Stress , Gastroenteritis/epidemiology
3.
Viruses ; 15(5)2023 05 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20237711

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The main goal of this study was to assess the potential clinical impact of an outpatient administration of available antivirals including SOT, N/R, and MOL to COVID-19 patients at high risk for disease progression. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis on 2606 outpatient individuals with mild to moderate COVID-19 at risk for disease progression, hospitalization, or death. After receiving either SOT (420/2606), MOL (1788/2606), or N/R (398/2606), patients were followed-up with regarding primary (hospitalization rate) and secondary (treatment and side effects) outcomes by phone. RESULT: A total of 2606 patients were treated at the outpatient clinic (SOT: 420; N/R: 398; MOL: 1788). 3.2% of the SOT patients (1 ICU admission), 0.8% of the MOL patients (2 ICU admissions), and none of the N/R patients were hospitalized. 14.3% of the N/R patients reported strong to severe side effects, exceeding SOT (2.6%) and MOL (5%) patients. A reduction in COVID symptoms after the treatment was experienced by 43% of patients in both the SOT and MOL groups and by 67% of patients in the N/R group, respectively. Women had a higher chance of symptom improvement with MOL (OR 1.2, 95%CI 1.0-1.5). CONCLUSION: All antiviral treatment options effectively prevented hospitalization in high-risk COVID-19 patients and were well tolerated. Side effects were pronounced in patients with N/R.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions , Humans , Female , Outpatients , Retrospective Studies , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Disease Progression , Lactams , Leucine
4.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(6): e2316642, 2023 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20236202

ABSTRACT

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a reduction in routine in-person medical care; however, it is unknown whether there have been any changes in visit rates among patients with hematologic neoplasms. Objective: To examine associations between the COVID-19 pandemic and in-person visits and telemedicine use among patients undergoing active treatment for hematologic neoplasms. Design, Setting, and Participants: Data for this retrospective observational cohort study were obtained from a nationwide electronic health record-derived, deidentified database. Data for patients with hematologic neoplasms who had received at least 1 systemic line of therapy between March 1, 2016, and February 28, 2021, were included. Treatments were categorized into 3 types: oral therapy, outpatient infusions, and inpatient infusions. The data cutoff date was April 30, 2021, when study analyses were conducted. Main Outcomes and Measures: Monthly visit rates were calculated as the number of documented visits (telemedicine or in-person) per active patient per 30-day period. We used time-series forecasting methods on prepandemic data (March 2016 to February 2020) to estimate expected rates between March 1, 2020, and February 28, 2021 (if the pandemic had not occurred). Results: This study included data for 24 261 patients, with a median age of 68 years (IQR, 60-75 years). A total of 6737 patients received oral therapy, 15 314 received outpatient infusions, and 8316 received inpatient infusions. More than half of patients were men (14 370 [58%]) and non-Hispanic White (16 309 [66%]). Early pandemic months (March to May 2020) demonstrated a significant 21% reduction (95% prediction interval [PI], 12%-27%) in in-person visit rates averaged across oral therapy and outpatient infusions. Reductions in in-person visit rates were also significant for all treatment types for multiple myeloma (oral therapy: 29% reduction; 95% PI, 21%-36%; P = .001; outpatient infusions: 11% reduction; 95% PI, 4%-17%; P = .002; inpatient infusions: 55% reduction; 95% PI, 27%-67%; P = .005), for oral therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (28% reduction; 95% PI, 12%-39%; P = .003), and for outpatient infusions for mantle cell lymphoma (38% reduction; 95% PI, 6%-54%; P = .003) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (20% reduction; 95% PI, 6%-31%; P = .002). Telemedicine visit rates were highest for patients receiving oral therapy, with greater use in the early pandemic months and a subsequent decrease in later months. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of patients with hematologic neoplasms, documented in-person visit rates for those receiving oral therapy and outpatient infusions significantly decreased during the early pandemic months but returned to close to projected rates in the later half of 2020. There were no statistically significant reductions in the overall in-person visit rate for patients receiving inpatient infusions. There was higher telemedicine use in the early pandemic months, followed by a decline, but use was persistent in the later half of 2020. Further studies are needed to ascertain associations between the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent cancer outcomes and the evolution of telemedicine use for care delivery.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hematologic Neoplasms , Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell , Male , Female , Humans , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Pandemics , Cohort Studies , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , Outpatients , Hematologic Neoplasms/epidemiology , Hematologic Neoplasms/therapy
5.
J Antimicrob Chemother ; 78(7): 1683-1688, 2023 07 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20234435

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare subsequent hospital admissions within 30 days for patients after receiving a prescription for either oral nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or oral molnupiravir. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 3207 high-risk, non-hospitalized adult COVID-19 patients who received a prescription for molnupiravir (n = 209) or nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (n = 2998) at an academic medical centre in New York City from April to December 2022. Variables including age, vaccination status, high-risk conditions and demographic factors were pulled from the electronic medical record. We used multivariable logistic regression to adjust for potential confounding variables. RESULTS: All-cause 30 day hospitalization was not significantly different between patients who received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir compared with molnupiravir (1.4% versus 1.9%, P value = 0.55). The association between COVID-related hospitalization and medication was also not significant (0.7%versus 0.5%, P value = 0.99). Patients who received molnupiravir were more likely to have more underlying high-risk conditions. After adjusting for potential confounders, the odds of all-cause hospitalizations were not significantly different between patients who received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir compared with molnupiravir (OR = 1.16, 95% CI: 0.4-3.3, P value = 0.79). CONCLUSIONS: These data provide additional evidence to support molnupiravir as a suitable alternative when other COVID-19 antivirals cannot be given.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Outpatients , Adult , Humans , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Prescriptions , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use
6.
Emerg Microbes Infect ; 12(2): 2220578, 2023 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20233706

ABSTRACT

Long COVID hinders people from normal life and work, posing significant medical and economic challenges. Nevertheless, comprehensive studies assessing its impact on large populations in Asia are still lacking. We tracked over 20,000 patients infected with COVID-19 for the first time during the Omicron BA.2 outbreak in Shanghai from March-June 2022 for one year. Of the 21,799 COVID-19 patients who participated in the 6-month telephone follow-up, 1939 (8.89%) had self-reported long COVID symptoms. 450 long COVID patients participated in the 6-month outpatient follow-up. Participants underwent healthy physical examinations and questionnaires focused on long-COVID-related symptoms and mental health. Mobility problem (P < 0.001), personal care problem (P = 0.003), usual activity problem (P < 0.001), pain/discomfort (P < 0.001), anxiety/depression (P = 0.001) and PTSD (P = 0.001) were more prevalent in long COVID patients than in healthy individuals, but no significant differences were found between the two groups on chest CT and laboratory examinations. Of the 856 long COVID patients who participated in the 12-month follow-up, 587 (68.5%) had their symptoms resolved. In the multivariable logistic analysis, females (P < 0.001), youth (age <40 years) (P < 0.001), ≥ 2 comorbidities (P = 0.009), and severe infection in the acute phase (P = 0.006) were risk factors for developing long COVID. Middle age (40-60 years) was a risk factor for persistent long COVID one year after hospital discharge (P = 0.013). The study found that long COVID mainly manifested as subjective symptoms and impacts partial patients' quality of life and mental status. After one year, most (68.5%) of the patients recovered from long COVID with no impairment of organ function observed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome , Female , Middle Aged , Adolescent , Humans , Adult , China/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Follow-Up Studies , Quality of Life , COVID-19/epidemiology , Outpatients
7.
Nervenarzt ; 94(7): 619-624, 2023 Jul.
Article in German | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20244667

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe mental illnesses are risk factors for SARS-CoV-2-related morbidity and mortality. Vaccination is an effective protection; therefore, high vaccination rates should be a major priority for people with mental illnesses. OBJECTIVES: (1) Identification of at-risk groups for non-vaccination and structures and interventions needed for widespread vaccination among people with mental illnesses from the perspective of outpatient psychiatrists and neurologists, (2) discussion of the results in the context of the international literature and (3) recommendations derived from them. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Qualitative content analysis of COVID-19 vaccination-related questions from the COVID Ψ online survey of n = 85 psychiatrists and neurologists in Germany. RESULTS: In the survey, people with schizophrenia, severe lack of drive, low socioeconomic status and homelessness were seen as risk groups for non-vaccination. Increased and targeted information, education, addressing and motivation and easily accessible vaccination offers by general practitioners, psychiatrists, and neurologists as well as complementary institutions were considered as important interventions. DISCUSSION: COVID-19 vaccinations as well as information, motivation and access support should be systematically offered by as many institutions of the psychiatric, psychotherapeutic and complementary care systems in Germany as possible.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mental Disorders , Psychiatry , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Outpatients , Mental Disorders/epidemiology
8.
Endocr Pract ; 29(7): 529-537, 2023 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20235696

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: We examined diabetes outpatient management during the first 2 years of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic in an endocrinology practice with a focus on health care disparities in outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study examining adults with diabetes during 3 time periods: T1 (March 2019-February 2020), T2 (March 2020-February 2021), and T3 (March 2021-February 2022). Clinical outcomes included body mass index (BMI), systolic blood pressure (SBP), Hemoglobin A1c (HgbA1c), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL), and urine albumin:creatinine ratio. Appointment types (virtual vs in-person) were also collected. RESULTS: Frequencies of HgbA1c, BMI, and SBP measurements reduced by 36.0%, 46.3%, and 48.5% in T2, respectively, and remaining 8.7% (HgbA1c), 13.4% (BMI), and 15.2% (SBP) lower at the end of the study period (P < .001) compared to prepandemic levels. However, the average HgbA1c and LDL slightly improved. Clinic appointments per patient increased during the pandemic, fueled by telehealth utilization. Women had fewer in-person visits during T2, those older than 65 had better HgbA1c, and the most socioeconomically deprived group had the worst HgbA1c during every time period. In addition, black patients had worse HgbA1c, LDL, and SBP values throughout the study, which did not worsen over the pandemic. CONCLUSION: While the frequency of health measurements had not fully recovered 2 years into the pandemic, this did not translate to worse diabetes management or a widening of pre-existing disparities. Our study emphasizes the role of equitable health care in minimizing inequalities in diabetes, particularly during times of crisis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus , Telemedicine , Adult , Humans , Female , Retrospective Studies , Outpatients , Healthcare Disparities , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Glycated Hemoglobin
9.
Influenza Other Respir Viruses ; 17(5): e13143, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20231202

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We estimated combined protection conferred by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination against COVID-19-associated acute respiratory illness (ARI). METHODS: During SARS-CoV-2 Delta (B.1.617.2) and Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant circulation between October 2021 and April 2022, prospectively enrolled adult patients with outpatient ARI had respiratory and filter paper blood specimens collected for SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing and serology. Dried blood spots were tested for immunoglobulin-G antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (NP) and spike protein receptor binding domain antigen using a validated multiplex bead assay. Evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection also included documented or self-reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. We used documented COVID-19 vaccination status to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) by multivariable logistic regression by prior infection status. RESULTS: Four hundred fifty-five (29%) of 1577 participants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection at enrollment; 209 (46%) case-patients and 637 (57%) test-negative patients were NP seropositive, had documented previous laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, or self-reported prior infection. Among previously uninfected patients, three-dose VE was 97% (95% confidence interval [CI], 60%-99%) against Delta, but not statistically significant against Omicron. Among previously infected patients, three-dose VE was 57% (CI, 20%-76%) against Omicron; VE against Delta could not be estimated. CONCLUSIONS: Three mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses provided additional protection against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant-associated illness among previously infected participants.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Adult , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Outpatients , Vaccine Efficacy
10.
PLoS One ; 18(5): e0284818, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2327297

ABSTRACT

Induction of labour, or starting labour artificially, is offered when the risks of continuing pregnancy are believed to outweigh the risks of the baby being born. In the United Kingdom, cervical ripening is recommended as the first stage of induction. Increasingly, maternity services are offering this outpatient or 'at home', despite limited evidence on its acceptability and how different approaches to cervical ripening work in practice. There is also a paucity of literature on clinicians' experiences of providing induction care in general, despite their central role in developing local guidelines and delivering this care. This paper explores induction, specifically cervical ripening and the option to return home during that process, from the perspective of midwives, obstetricians and other maternity staff. As part of a process evaluation involving five case studies undertaken in British maternity services, interviews and focus groups were conducted with clinicians who provide induction of labour care. The thematic findings were generated through in-depth analysis and are grouped to reflect key points within the process of cervical ripening care: 'Implementing home cervical ripening', 'Putting local policy into practice', 'Giving information about induction' and 'Providing cervical ripening'. A range of practices and views regarding induction were recorded, showing how the integration of home cervical ripening is not always straightforward. Findings demonstrate that providing induction of labour care is complex and represents a significant workload. Home cervical ripening was seen as a solution to managing this workload; however, findings highlighted ways in which this expectation might not be borne out in practice. More comprehensive research is needed on workload impacts and possible lateral effects within other areas of maternity services.


Subject(s)
Midwifery , Oxytocics , Pregnancy , Female , Humans , Cervical Ripening , Labor, Induced , Outpatients , Hospitals
11.
Clin Infect Dis ; 77(1): 32-37, 2023 07 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2327044

ABSTRACT

Mutations accumulated by novel Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Omicron sublineages contribute to evasion of previously effective monoclonal antibodies for treatment or prevention of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Other authorized or approved antiviral drugs such as nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, remdesivir, and molnupiravir are, however, predicted to maintain activity against these sublineages and are key tools to reduce severe COVID-19 outcomes in vulnerable populations. A stepwise approach may be taken to target the appropriate antiviral drug to the appropriate patient, beginning with identifying whether a patient is at high risk for hospitalization or other complications of COVID-19. Among higher risk individuals, patient profile (including factors such as age, organ function, and comedications) and antiviral drug access inform suitable antiviral drug selection. When applied in targeted fashion, these therapies serve as a complement to vital ongoing nonpharmaceutical interventions and vaccination strategies that reduce morbidity and maximize protection against COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Outpatients , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
12.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(5): e2314393, 2023 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2324595

ABSTRACT

Importance: Diabetes and COVID-19 are both global pandemics, and type 2 diabetes is a common comorbidity in patients with acute COVID-19 and is proven to be a key determinant of COVID-19 prognosis. Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir are oral antiviral medications recently approved for nonhospitalized patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, following demonstration of their efficacies in reducing adverse outcomes of the disease; it is crucial to clarify whether both oral antiviral medications are efficacious in a population consisting exclusively of patients with type 2 diabetes. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in a contemporary population-based cohort comprising exclusively nonhospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was performed using population-based electronic medical record data for patients in Hong Kong with type 2 diabetes and confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between February 26 and October 23, 2022. Each patient was followed up until death, outcome event, crossover of oral antiviral treatment, or end of the observational period (October 30, 2022), whichever came first. Outpatient oral antiviral users were divided into molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment groups, respectively, and nontreated control participants were matched through 1:1 propensity score matching. Data analysis was performed on March 22, 2023. Exposures: Molnupiravir (800 mg twice daily for 5 days) or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (300 mg nirmatrelvir and 100 mg ritonavir twice daily for 5 days, or 150 mg nirmatrelvir and 100 mg ritonavir for patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 30-59 mL/min per 1.73 m2). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and/or hospitalization. The secondary outcome was in-hospital disease progression. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated with Cox regression. Results: This study identified 22 098 patients with type 2 diabetes and COVID-19. A total of 3390 patients received molnupiravir and 2877 received nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in the community setting. After application of exclusion criteria followed by 1:1 propensity score matching, this study comprised 2 groups. One group included 921 molnupiravir users (487 men [52.9%]), with a mean (SD) age of 76.7 (10.8) years, and 921 control participants (482 men [52.3%]), with a mean (SD) age of 76.6 (11.7) years. The other group included 793 nirmatrelvir-ritonavir users (401 men [50.6%]), with a mean (SD) age of 71.7 (11.5) years, and 793 control participants (395 men [49.8%]), with a mean (SD) age of 71.9 (11.6) years. At a median follow-up of 102 days (IQR, 56-225 days), molnupiravir use was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality and/or hospitalization (HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.64-0.79]; P < .001) and in-hospital disease progression (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.35-0.69]; P < .001) compared with nonuse. At a median follow-up of 85 days (IQR, 56-216 days), nirmatrelvir-ritonavir use was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality and/or hospitalization (HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.63-0.80]; P < .001) and a nonsignificantly lower risk of in-hospital disease progression (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.59-1.44]; P = .73) compared with nonuse. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that both molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir oral antiviral medications were associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality and hospitalization among patients with COVID-19 and type 2 diabetes. Further studies in specific populations, such as individuals in residential care homes and individuals with chronic kidney disease, are suggested.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Aged , Humans , Male , Antiviral Agents , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Disease Progression , Hong Kong/epidemiology , Hospitalization , Outpatients , Retrospective Studies , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Female
13.
J Neurol ; 270(7): 3294-3302, 2023 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2326111

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Post-COVID-Fatigue (PCF) is one of the most reported symptoms following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Currently, research on persistent symptoms focuses mainly on severe infections, while outpatients are rarely included in observations. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the severity of PCF is related to the number of acute and persistent symptoms due to mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and to compare the most common symptoms during acute infection with the persistent symptoms in PCF patients. METHODS: A total of 425 participants were examined after COVID-19 treated as an outpatient (median 249 days [IQR: 135; 322] after acute disease) at the site of University Hospital Augsburg, Germany. The Fatigue Assessment Scale (FAS) was used to quantify the severity of PCF. The number of symptoms (maximum 41) during acute infection and persistent symptoms (during the last 14 days before examination) were added up to sum scores. Multivariable linear regression models were used to show the association between the number of symptoms and PCF. RESULTS: Of the 425 participants, 37% (n = 157) developed PCF; most were women (70%). The median number of symptoms was significantly higher in the PCF group than in the non-PCF group at both time points. In multivariable linear regression models, both sum scores were associated with PCF (acute symptoms: ß-estimate per additional symptom [95%-CI]: 0.48 [0.39; 0.57], p < 0.0001); persistent symptoms: ß-estimate per additional symptom [95%-CI]: 1.18 [1.02; 1.34], p < 0.0001). The acute symptoms strongest associated with PCF severity were difficulty concentrating, memory problems, dyspnea or shortness of breath on exertion, palpitations, and problems with movement coordination. CONCLUSION: Each additional symptom that occurs in COVID-19 increases the likelihood of suffering a higher severity of PCF. Further research is needed to identify the aetiology of PCF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Nr. NCT04615026. Date of registration: November 4, 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Female , Male , COVID-19/complications , Outpatients , SARS-CoV-2 , Risk Factors , Fatigue/epidemiology , Fatigue/etiology
14.
Circulation ; 147(25): 1891-1901, 2023 06 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2318184

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) is associated with heightened risks of venous and arterial thrombosis and hospitalization due to respiratory failure. To assess whether prophylactic anticoagulation can safely reduce the frequency of venous and arterial thrombosis, hospitalization, and death in nonhospitalized patients with symptomatic COVID-19 and at least one thrombosis risk factor, we conducted the PREVENT-HD double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial (A Study of Rivaroxaban to Reduce the Risk of Major Venous and Arterial Thrombotic Events, Hospitalization and Death in Medically Ill Outpatients With Acute, Symptomatic COVID-19] Infection). METHODS: PREVENT-HD was conducted between August 2020 and April 2022 at 14 US integrated health care delivery networks. A virtual trial design used remote informed consent and clinical monitoring and facilitated data collection through electronic health record integration with a cloud-based research platform. Nonhospitalized patients with symptomatic COVID-19 and at least one thrombosis risk factor were enrolled and randomly assigned to either 10 mg of oral rivaroxaban or placebo daily for 35 days. The primary efficacy outcome was time to first occurrence of a composite of symptomatic venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, acute limb ischemia, non-central nervous system systemic arterial embolism, hospitalization, or death through day 35. The principal safety end point was International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis critical-site or fatal bleeding. The last study visit was on day 49. RESULTS: The study was terminated prematurely because of enrollment challenges and a lower-than-expected blinded pooled event rate. A total of 1284 patients underwent randomization with complete accrual of primary events through May 2022. No patients were lost to follow-up. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 22 of 641 in the rivaroxaban group and 19 of 643 in the placebo group (3.4% versus 3.0%; hazard ratio, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.63-2.15]; P=0.63). No patient in either group experienced critical-site or fatal bleeding. One patient receiving rivaroxaban had a major bleed. CONCLUSIONS: The study was terminated prematurely after enrollment of 32% of planned accrual because of recruitment challenges and lower-than-expected event rate. Rivaroxaban prescribed for 35 days in nonhospitalized patients with symptomatic COVID-19 at risk for thrombosis did not appear to reduce a composite end point of venous and arterial thrombotic events, hospitalization, and death. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT04508023.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Thrombosis , Humans , Rivaroxaban/adverse effects , Outpatients , Thrombosis/epidemiology , Thrombosis/prevention & control , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Hemorrhage/drug therapy , Hospitalization , Anticoagulants/adverse effects
15.
BMC Res Notes ; 16(1): 70, 2023 May 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2316812

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the change in the number of outpatient visits in Japan since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, using data on the outpatient claims submitted by medical institutions to insurers in 2019 and 2020, from the National Database of Health Insurance Claims and Specific Health Check-ups. We calculated the total number of outpatient visits, and number of visits for individual diseases according to the International Classification of Diseases-10 codes on the claim form. RESULTS: The number of outpatient visits per million people decreased by 9.98% in 2020 compared to 2019. Of the diseases included in the analysis, 71 showed a decrease in the number of visits by ≥ 1%. There were significant decreases in the number of visits related to infectious diseases (influenza, acute bronchitis, and acute laryngitis, etc.), and chronic diseases (hemorrhoids, cystic kidney disease, dyspepsia, and chronic sinusitis, etc.). The observed decreased rate of outpatient visit might have been due to, a decrease in the incidence of disease, a decreased frequency of visit by patients with the disease, or both. Our analysis method using actual health insurance claim data can be applied worldwide, where researchers have access to national information on health insurance claims.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Outpatients , Humans , Japan/epidemiology , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Insurance, Health , Chronic Disease
16.
Transplant Proc ; 55(5): 1283-1288, 2023 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2315849

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patients who have performed solid organ transplantation in terms of COVID-19 infection are included in the high-risk group. In this study, it was aimed to evaluate the relationship between vaccination and retrospective evaluation of 32 patients who underwent a heart transplant in the clinic and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction. METHODS: In this study, demographic characteristics of the cases, comorbidities, timing of heart transplantation, immunosuppressive treatments, symptoms of COVID-19 infection, lung imaging findings, follow-up (outpatient/inpatient), treatments, 1-month mortality, and vaccination histories against COVID-19 infection were evaluated. The data obtained from the study were analyzed with SPSS version 25.0. RESULTS: The 3 most common symptoms are cough (37.5%), myalgia (28.1%), and fever (21.8%). COVID-19 infection was severe in 6.2% of the patients, moderate in 37.5%, and mild in 56.2%. Hospitalization was required in 5 patients (15.6%, 1 in the intensive care unit), and the other patients were followed up as an outpatient. Severe COVID-19 infection was seen more in 33% of unvaccinated patients; 93.5% were vaccinated. Nineteen patients (68%) were vaccinated before COVID-19 infection. Our patients received the CoronoVac (Sinovac, China) vaccine. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 infection is more likely to be severe and mortal in patients with heart transplant recipients. It is also crucial to comply with preventive measures other than immunization in this group of patients. This study is the largest series investigating COVID-19 infection in heart transplant recipient patients in our country.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Heart Transplantation , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Heart Transplantation/adverse effects , Outpatients , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Transplant Recipients
17.
J Child Neurol ; 38(5): 263-269, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2315005

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Children of minority race/ethnicity face barriers to accessing specialty services. During the COVID pandemic, health insurance companies reimbursed telehealth services. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of audio versus video visits on children's access to outpatient neurology services, particularly for Black children. METHODS: Using Electronic Health Record data, we collected information about children who had outpatient neurology appointments in a tertiary care children's hospital in North Carolina from March 10, 2020, to March 9, 2021. We used multivariable models to compare appointment outcomes (canceled vs completed, and missed vs completed) by visit type. We then conducted similar evaluation for the subgroup of Black children. RESULTS: A total of 1250 children accounted for 3829 scheduled appointments. Audio users were more likely to be Black and Hispanic, and to have public health insurance than video users. Adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for appointments completed versus canceled was 10 for audio and 6 for video, compared to in-person appointments. Audio visits were twice as likely as in-person visits to be completed versus missed; video visits were not different. For the subgroup of Black children, aOR for appointments completed versus canceled for audio was 9 and video was 5, compared to in-person appointments. For Black children, audio visits were 3 times as likely as in-person visits to be completed versus missed; video visits were not different. CONCLUSIONS: Audio visits improved access to pediatric neurology services, especially for Black children. Reversal of policies to reimburse audio visits could deepen the socioeconomic divide for children's access to neurology services.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neurology , Telemedicine , Humans , Child , Outpatients , COVID-19/epidemiology , Ambulatory Care
18.
BMC Psychiatry ; 23(1): 315, 2023 05 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2320076

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Antisocial behavior during adolescence can have long-lasting negative effects and leads to high societal costs. Forensic Outpatient Systemic Therapy (Forensische Ambulante Systeem Therapie; FAST) is a promising treatment for juveniles aged 12-21 showing severe antisocial behavior. The intensity, content and duration of FAST can be adjusted to the needs of the juvenile and their caregiver(s), which is considered crucial for effective treatment. Next to the regular version of FAST (FASTr), a blended version (FASTb) in which face-to-face contacts are replaced by minimally 50% online contacts over the duration of intervention was developed during the Covid-19 pandemic. The current study will investigate whether FASTb is equally effective as FASTr, and through which mechanisms of change, for whom, and under which conditions FASTr and FASTb work. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be carried out. Participants (N = 200) will be randomly assigned to FASTb (n = 100) or FASTr (n = 100). Data collection will consist of self-report questionnaires and case file analysis, and include a pre-test at the start of the intervention, a post-test immediately after the intervention, and a six month follow-up. Mechanisms of change will be investigated using monthly questionnaires of key variables during treatment. Official recidivism data will be collected at two-year follow-up. DISCUSSION: This study aims to improve the effectiveness and quality of forensic mental health care for juveniles with antisocial behavior by studying the effectiveness of blended care, which has not been studied before in treatment of externalizing behavior. If found to be at least as effective as face-to-face treatment, blended treatment can help meet the urgent need for more flexible and efficient interventions in this field. In addition, the proposed study aims to unravel what works for whom, knowledge urgently needed in mental health care for juveniles with severe antisocial behavior. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on 07/11/2022, registration number NCT05606978.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Outpatients , Adolescent , Humans , Antisocial Personality Disorder/therapy , Treatment Outcome , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
19.
BMC Infect Dis ; 23(1): 287, 2023 May 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2319916

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Decision-makers impose COVID-19 mitigations based on public health indicators such as reported cases, which are sensitive to fluctuations in supply and demand for diagnostic testing, and hospital admissions, which lag infections by up to two weeks. Imposing mitigations too early has unnecessary economic costs while imposing too late leads to uncontrolled epidemics with unnecessary cases and deaths. Sentinel surveillance of recently-symptomatic individuals in outpatient testing sites may overcome biases and lags in conventional indicators, but the minimal outpatient sentinel surveillance system needed for reliable trend estimation remains unknown. METHODS: We used a stochastic, compartmental transmission model to evaluate the performance of various surveillance indicators at reliably triggering an alarm in response to, but not before, a step increase in transmission of SARS-CoV-2. The surveillance indicators included hospital admissions, hospital occupancy, and sentinel cases with varying levels of sampling effort capturing 5, 10, 20, 50, or 100% of incident mild cases. We tested 3 levels of transmission increase, 3 population sizes, and conditions of either simultaneous transmission increase or lagged increase in the older population. We compared the indicators' performance at triggering alarm soon after, but not prior, to the transmission increase. RESULTS: Compared to surveillance based on hospital admissions, outpatient sentinel surveillance that captured at least 20% of incident mild cases could trigger an alarm 2 to 5 days earlier for a mild increase in transmission and 6 days earlier for a moderate or strong increase. Sentinel surveillance triggered fewer false alarms and averted more deaths per day spent in mitigation. When transmission increase in older populations lagged the increase in younger populations by 14 days, sentinel surveillance extended its lead time over hospital admissions by an additional 2 days. CONCLUSIONS: Sentinel surveillance of mild symptomatic cases can provide more timely and reliable information on changes in transmission to inform decision-makers in an epidemic like COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Sentinel Surveillance , Outpatients , Public Health
20.
Laryngorhinootologie ; 102(7): 521-532, 2023 07.
Article in German | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2319809

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Even after weeks and months, persisting and also newly occurring symptoms after SARS-CoV-2 infection are common and lead in many cases to a broad spectrum of impairments and participation restrictions in all areas of daily life. Scientific evidence on therapeutic options still is limited. The aim of this work is therefore to provide pragmatic treatment recommendations analogous to the current therapeutic appliances guideline. METHOD: In addition to a search in six electronic databases, the experiences from the treatment of more than hundred affected persons from the post-COVID outpatient rehabilitation service were used. Additionally, experiences with patients with similar symptoms from other diseases were included. All authors worked together to develop the pragmatic recommendations for the treatment of the main symptoms within the framework of outpatient therapy measures. A list of recommended diagnostics and functional assessments prior to therapy was also developed. RESULTS: For the main symptoms fatigue, dyspnoea and cognitive impairment, the catalog of therapeutic products offers a wide range of therapeutic options under the diagnosis U09.9. The therapy packages should be composed individually and adapted to the patient's performance level that regularly should be (re-)assessed. Informing the patient about possible relapses and deteriorations and how to deal with them should be also part of the treatment regimen. DISCUSSION: Physical modalities and rehabilitation interventions should be used in out-patient rehabilitation setting for the treatment of Long-COVID. In this regard, it is also important to take into account and treat serious complications after the disease, such as post-intensive care syndrome. Due to the rapid evolution of the knowledge a frequent review of scientific papers and recommendations should be conducted. High-quality intervention studies are necessary to achieve greater evidence in this field.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Outpatients , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL