Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Delayed Diagnosis , Humans , Neoplasms/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2 , Time-to-TreatmentABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: There is uncertainty about when the first cases of COVID-19 appeared in Spain. We aimed to determine whether influenza diagnoses masked early COVID-19 cases and estimate numbers of undetected COVID-19 cases. DESIGN: Time-series study of influenza and COVID-19 cases, 2010-2020. SETTING: Primary care, Catalonia, Spain. PARTICIPANTS: People registered in primary-care practices, covering >6 million people and >85% of the population. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Weekly new cases of influenza and COVID-19 clinically diagnosed in primary care. ANALYSES: Daily counts of both cases were computed using the total cases recorded over the previous 7 days to avoid weekly effects. Epidemic curves were characterised for the 2010-2011 to 2019-2020 influenza seasons. Influenza seasons with a similar epidemic curve and peak case number as the 2019-2020 season were used to model expected case numbers with Auto Regressive Integrated Moving Average models, overall and stratified by age. Daily excess influenza cases were defined as the number of observed minus expected cases. RESULTS: Four influenza season curves (2011-2012, 2012-2013, 2013-2014 and 2016-2017) were used to estimate the number of expected cases of influenza in 2019-2020. Between 4 February 2020 and 20 March 2020, 8017 (95% CI: 1841 to 14 718) excess influenza cases were identified. This excess was highest in the 15-64 age group. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 cases may have been present in the Catalan population when the first imported case was reported on 25 February 2020. COVID-19 carriers may have been misclassified as influenza diagnoses in primary care, boosting community transmission before public health measures were taken. The use of clinical codes could misrepresent the true occurrence of the disease. Serological or PCR testing should be used to confirm these findings. In future, this surveillance of excess influenza could help detect new outbreaks of COVID-19 or other influenza-like pathogens, to initiate early public health responses.
Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Influenza, Human , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Adolescent , Adult , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Diagnosis, Differential , Electronic Health Records/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Influenza, Human/diagnosis , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Needs Assessment , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Public Health/methods , Public Health/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Seasons , Spain/epidemiologyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: After the introduction of a new protocol based on the early treatment with indomethacin for patent ductus arteriosus, the objective of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of this new practice in comparison with the safety and efficacy of the conventional treatment in a high-risk population. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study including 154 newborns with an average gestational age of 26.4 weeks (1.37 standard deviation) and an average birth weight of 855 g (201.5 standard deviation). A statistically descriptive analysis was performed with SPSS Statistics Pack version 17.0. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any statistically significant differences in the clinical features of the two treatment groups, nor in the main efficacy, morbidity, and mortality results.
