Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the trajectory of the number of bronchoscopies performed in a tertiary hospital in Kyoto city.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has restricted many medical practices. We aimed to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of bronchoscopies, outpatients, and hospital admissions. We retrospectively analyzed the number of outpatients, admissions, and bronchoscopies performed between March 2020 and May 2022. We defined "Peak month of the pandemic," "Wave of the pandemic," "Month in the wave," and "Period of a state of emergency" for each analysis. In the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, analysis of variance (ANOVA) in linear mixed models indicated significant effects of "month in each wave" on the number of bronchoscopies (P = .003), outpatients (P = .041), and admissions (P = .017). The number of outpatients, admissions, and bronchoscopies was significantly influenced by the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. In contrast, in the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic, a mixed-ANOVA indicated significant effects of "month in each wave" only on the number of outpatients (P = .020) but no significant effects on the number of bronchoscopies (P = .407) and admissions (P = .219). During the second year of the pandemic, the number of bronchoscopies and admissions was not significantly affected by the waves of the pandemic. There were no significant differences in the number of admissions and bronchoscopies between the fourth and sixth waves. Although the number of bronchoscopies was found to be significantly affected in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, the impact of the pandemic was much more limited thereafter.

Pneumonia Caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 and Influenza Virus: A Multicenter Comparative Study.

BACKGROUND: Detailed differences in clinical information between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pneumonia (CP), which is the main phenotype of SARS-CoV-2 disease, and influenza pneumonia (IP) are still unclear. METHODS: A prospective, multicenter cohort study was conducted by including patients with CP who were hospitalized between January and June 2020 and a retrospective cohort of patients with IP hospitalized from 2009 to 2020. We compared the clinical presentations and studied the prognostic factors of CP and IP. RESULTS: Compared with the IP group (n = 66), in the multivariate analysis, the CP group (n = 362) had a lower percentage of patients with underlying asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P < .01), lower neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (P < .01), lower systolic blood pressure (P < .01), higher diastolic blood pressure (P < .01), lower aspartate aminotransferase level (P < .05), higher serum sodium level (P < .05), and more frequent multilobar infiltrates (P < .05). The diagnostic scoring system based on these findings showed excellent differentiation between CP and IP (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.889). Moreover, the prognostic predictors were different between CP and IP. CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive differences between CP and IP were revealed, highlighting the need for early differentiation between these 2 pneumonias in clinical settings.