Incidence of Chronic Kidney Disease Following Acute Coronavirus Disease 2019 Based on South Carolina Statewide Data.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was associated with severe acute illness including multiple organ failure. Acute kidney injury (AKI) was a common finding, often requiring dialysis support. OBJECTIVE: Define the incidence of new clinically identified chronic kidney disease (CKD) among patients with COVID-19 and no pre-existing kidney disease. DESIGN PARTICIPANTS: The South Carolina (SC) Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC) COVID-19 mandatory reporting registry of SC residents testing for COVID-19 between March 2020 and October 2021 was included. DESIGN MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was a new incidence of a CKD diagnosis (N18.x) in those without a pre-existing diagnosis of CKD during the follow-up period of March 2020 to January 14, 2022. Patients were stratified by severity of illness (hospitalized or not, intensive care unit needed or not). The new incidence of CKD diagnosis was examined using logistic regression and cox proportional hazards analyses. KEY RESULTS: Among patients with COVID-19 (N = 683,958) without a pre-existing CKD diagnosis, 8322 (1.2 %) were found to have a new diagnosis of CKD. The strongest predictors for subsequent CKD diagnosis were age ≥ 60 years hazard ratio (HR) 31.5 (95% confidence interval [95%CI] 25.5-38.8), and intervening (between COVID-19 and CKD diagnoses) AKI diagnosis HR 20.7 (95%CI 19.7-21.7). The presence of AKI was associated with an HR of 23.6, 95% CI 22.3-25.0, among those not hospitalized, and HR of 6.2, 95% CI 5.7-6.8 among those hospitalized, for subsequent CKD. COVID-19 was not significantly associated with subsequent CKD after accounting for the severity of illness and comorbidities. CONCLUSION: Among SC residents, COVID-19 was not associated with CKD independent from indicators of the severity of illness, especially AKI diagnosis. Kidney-specific follow-up testing may be reserved for those high-risk for CKD development. Further prospective registries should examine the long-term kidney consequences to confirm these findings.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the dynamic HIV care engagement among people with HIV: real-world evidence.

INTRODUCTION: Existing studies examining the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on engagement in HIV care often capture cross-sectional status, while lacking longitudinal evaluations. This study examined the impact of the pandemic on the longitudinal dynamic change of retention in care and viral suppression status. METHODS: The electronic health record (EHR) data of this population-level cohort study were retrieved from the statewide electronic HIV/AIDS reporting system in South Carolina. The study population was people with HIV (PWH) who had at least one year's symmetric follow-up observation record before and after the pandemic. Multivariable generalized linear mixed regression models were employed to analyze the impact of the pandemic on these outcomes, adjusting for socio-demographic characteristics and preexisting comorbidities. RESULTS: In the adjusted models, PWH had a lower likelihood of retention in care (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.806, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.769, 0.844) and a higher probability of virological failure (aOR: 1.240, 95% CI: 1.169, 1.316) during the peri-pandemic period than pre-pandemic period. Results from interaction effect analysis from each cohort revealed that the negative effect of the pandemic on retention in care was more severe among PWH with high comorbidity burden than those without any comorbidity; meanwhile, a more striking virological failure was observed among PWH who reside in urban areas than in rural areas. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has a negative impact on retention in care and viral suppression among PWH in South Carolina, particularly for individuals with comorbidities and residing in urban areas.

How Different Pre-existing Mental Disorders and Their Co-occurrence Affects COVID-19 Clinical Outcomes? A Real-World Data Study in the Southern United States

Background Although a psychiatric history might be an independent risk factor for COVID-19 infection and mortality, no studies have systematically investigated how different clusters of pre-existing mental disorders may affect COVID-19 clinical outcomes or showed how the coexistence of mental disorder clusters is related to COVID-19 clinical outcomes. Methods Using a retrospective cohort study design, a total of 476,775 adult patients with lab-confirmed and probable COVID-19 between March 06, 2020 and April 14, 2021 in South Carolina, United States were included in the current study. The electronic health record data of COVID-19 patients were linked to all payer-based claims data through the SC Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office. Pre-existing mental disorder diagnoses from Jan 2, 2019 to Jan 14, 2021 were extracted from the patients' healthcare utilization data via ICD-10 codes. Results There is an elevated risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization and death among participants with pre-existing mental disorders adjusting for key socio-demographic and comorbidity covariates. Co-occurrence of any two clusters was positively associated with COVID-19-related hospitalization and death. The odds ratio of being hospitalized was 1.26 (95% CI: 1.151, 1.383) for patients with internalizing and externalizing disorders, 1.65 (95% CI: 1.298, 2.092) for internalizing and thought disorders, 1.76 (95% CI: 1.217, 2.542) for externalizing and thought disorders, and 1.64 (95% CI: 1.274, 2.118) for three clusters of mental disorders. Conclusions Pre-existing internalizing disorders and thought disorders are positively related to COVID-19 hospitalization and death. Co-occurrence of any two clusters of mental disorders have elevated risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization and death compared to those with a single cluster.

Examining Social Determinants of Health During a Pandemic: Clinical Application of Z Codes Before and During COVID-19.

Recognition of the impact of social determinants of health (SDoH) on healthcare outcomes, healthcare service utilization, and population health has prompted a global shift in focus to patient social needs and lived experiences in assessment and treatment. The International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) provides a list of non-billable "Z codes" specific to SDoH for use in electronic health records. Using population-level analysis, this study aims to examine clinical application of Z codes in South Carolina before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study population consists of South Carolina residents who had a healthcare visit and had their COVID-19 test result reported to the state's Department of Health and Environmental Control before January 14, 2021. Of the 1,190,531 individuals in the overall sample, Z codes were used only for 14,665 (1.23%) of the patients, including 2,536 (0.97%) COVID-positive patients and 12,129 (1.30%) COVID-negative patients. Compared with hospitals that did not use Z codes, those that did were significantly more likely to have higher bed capacity (p = 0.017) and to be teaching hospitals (p = 0.03), although this was significant only among COVID-19 positive individuals. Those at inpatient visits were most likely to receive Z codes (OR: 5.26; 95% CI: 5.14, 5.38; p < 0.0001) compared to those at outpatient visits (OR: 0.07; 95%CI: 0.06, 0.07; p < 0.0001). There was a slight increase of Z code use from 2019 to 2020 (OR: 1.33, 95% CI: 1.30, 1.36; p < 0.0001), which was still significant when stratified by facility type across time. As one of the first studies to examine Z code use among a large patient population, findings clearly indicate underutilization by providers. Additional study is needed to understand the potentially long-lasting health effects related to SDoH among underserved populations.

Psychological Status and Job Burnout of Nurses Working in the Frontline of the Novel Coronavirus in China During the Delta Variant Outbreak: A Cross-Sectional Survey

Purpose Investigating psychological status and job burnout of nurses working in the frontline of the novel coronavirus in Zhangjiajie city in China during the Delta variant outbreak, comparing differences and analyzing factors of these two variables between the nurses from different nucleic acid testing (NAT) sites. Patients and methods This survey was conducted from August 1 to 31, 2021. The participants were 512 nurses, 198 nurses of whom were from temporary NAT sites in communities/towns in Zhangjiajie city, and the rest were from NAT sites inside hospitals. The psychological status and the job burnout were measured by the Symptom Checklist-90 (SCL-90) and the Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Scale (MBI-GS). Results The prevalence of the SCL-90 positive result and job burnout were 49.4% and 61.1%, respectively. The factors influencing the psychological status of nurses included the contact with COVID-19 patients or their body fluids and specimens, working seniority and the duration of working in the frontline of the novel coronavirus. The independent risk factors of nurses’ job burnout included the following four factors. Firstly, the contact with COVID-19 patients or their body fluids and specimens (OR=150.95, 95% CI=(44.87,507.77), P<0.001). Secondly, five to nine years of working seniority (OR=8.91, 95% CI=(3.59,22.14), P<0.001). Thirdly, 10 to 19 days (OR=2.63, 95% CI=(1.19,5.82), P=0.017), 20 to 29 days (OR=161.31, 95% CI=(49.48,525.9), P<0.001). Lastly, more than 30 days (OR=92.05, 95% CI=(33.88,250.14), P<0.001) of working in the frontline of the novel coronavirus. Conclusion The prevalence of psychological problems and job burnout were at a high level among nurses working in the frontline of the novel coronavirus in different NAT sites. The nurses from NAT sites inside hospitals and temporary NAT sites in communities/towns in Zhangjiajie city had an equal risk of developing psychological problems and job burnout. Interventions need to be immediately implemented to promote psychological well-being and decrease job burnout of nurses.

Demographic Disparities in Clinical Outcomes of COVID-19: Data From a Statewide Cohort in South Carolina.

BACKGROUND: Current literature examining the clinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients under-represent COVID-19 cases who were either asymptomatic or had mild symptoms. METHODS: We analyzed statewide data from 280 177 COVID-19 cases from various health care facilities during March 4-December 31, 2020. Each COVID-19 case was reported using the standardized Case Report Form (CRF), which collected information on demographic characteristics, symptoms, hospitalization, and death. We used multivariable logistic regression to analyze the associations between sociodemographics and disease severity, hospitalization, and mortality. RESULTS: Among a total of 280 177 COVID-19 cases, 5.2% (14 451) were hospitalized and 1.9% (5308) died. Older adults, males, and Black individuals had higher odds of hospitalization and death from COVID-19 (all P < 0.0001). In particular, individuals residing in rural areas experienced a high risk of death (odds ratio [OR], 1.16; 95% CI, 1.08-1.25). Regarding disease severity, older adults (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.10) and Hispanic or Latino patients (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.95-2.18) had higher odds of experiencing moderate/severe symptoms, while male and Asian patients, compared with White patients, had lower odds of experiencing moderate/severe symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: As the first statewide population-based study using data from multiple health care systems with a long follow-up period in the United States, we provide a more generalizable picture of COVID-19 symptoms and clinical outcomes. The findings from this study reinforce the fact that rural residence and racial/ethnic social determinants of health, unfortunately, remain predictors of adverse health outcomes for COVID-19 patients.