Costs of management of acute respiratory infections in older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) accounted for an estimated 3.9 million deaths worldwide in 2015, of which 56% occurred in adults aged 60 years or older. We aimed to identify the cost of ARI management in older adults (≥50 years) in order to develop an evidence base to assist decision-making for resource allocation and inform clinical practice. Methods: We searched 8 electronic databases including Global Health, Medline and EMBASE for studies published between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2021. Total management costs per patient per ARI episode were extracted and meta-analysis was conducted by World Health Organization (WHO) region and World Bank income level. All costs were converted and inflated to Euros (€) (2021 average exchange rate). The quality of included studies and the potential risk of bias were evaluated. Results: A total of 42 publications were identified for inclusion, reporting cost data for 8 082 752 ARI episodes in older adults across 20 countries from 2001 to 2021. The majority (86%) of studies involved high-income countries based in Europe, North America and Western Pacific. The mean cost per episode was €17 803.9 for inpatient management and €128.9 for outpatient management. Compared with costs reported for patients aged <65 years, inpatient costs were €154.1, €7 018.8 and €8 295.6 higher for patients aged 65-74 years, 75-84 years and over 85 years. ARI management of at-risk patients with comorbid conditions and patients requiring higher level of care, incurred substantially higher costs for hospitalization: €735.9 and €1317.3 respectively. Conclusions: ARIs impose a substantial economic burden on health systems, governments, patients and societies. This study identified high ARI management costs in older adults, reinforcing calls for investment by global health players to quantify and address the scale of the challenge. There are large gaps in data availability from low-income countries, especially from South East Asia and Africa regions.

Pharmacological Predictors of Morbidity and Mortality in COVID-19.

The interaction of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) with the majority of common prescriptions is broadly unknown. The purpose of this study is to identify medications associated with altered disease outcomes in COVID-19. A retrospective cohort composed of all adult inpatient admissions to our center with COVID-19 was analyzed. Data concerning all antecedent prescriptions were collected and agents brought forward for analysis if prescribed to at least 20 patients in our cohort. Forty-two medications and 22 classes of medication were examined. Groups were propensity score matched and analyzed by logistic and linear regression. The majority of medications did not show a statistically significant relationship with altered disease outcomes. Lower mortality was associated with use of pregabalin (hazard ratio [HR], 0.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.92; P = .049) and inhalers of any type (HR, 0.33; 95%CI, 0.14-0.80; P = .015), specifically beclomethasone (HR, 0.10; 95%CI, 0.01-0.82; P = .032), tiotropium (HR, 0.07; 95%CI, 0.01-0.83; P = .035), and steroid-containing inhalers (HR, 0.35; 95%CI, 0.15-0.79; P = .013). Gliclazide (HR, 4.37; 95%CI, 1.26-15.18; P = .020) and proton pump inhibitor (HR, 1.72; 95%CI, 1.06-2.79; P = .028) use was associated with greater mortality. Diuretic (HR, 0.07; 95%CI, 0.01-0.37; P = .002) and statin (HR, 0.35; 95%CI, 0.17-0.73; P = .006) use was associated with lower rates of critical care admission. Our data lends confidence to observing usual practice in patients with COVID-19 by continuing antecedent prescriptions in the absence of an alternative acute contraindication. We highlight potential benefits in investigation of diuretics, inhalers, pregabalin, and statins as therapeutic agents for COVID-19 and support further assessment of the safety of gliclazide and proton pump inhibitors in the acute illness.

Inpatient Omission of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers Is Associated With Morbidity and Mortality in Coronavirus Disease 2019.

PURPOSE: Due to the affinity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 for the human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor, use of ACE inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) has been a major concern for clinicians during the 2020 pandemic. Meta-analyses have affirmed that these agents do not worsen clinical outcomes in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. To date, only a limited number of studies have directly evaluated the safety of inpatient prescription of ACE inhibitors/ARBs during acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) illness. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted to investigate the impact of inpatient provision of ACE inhibitors/ARBs on morbidity and mortality in patients admitted to the hospital with COVID-19. Relationships were explored by using linear and logistic regression. FINDINGS: A total of 612 adult patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 151 (24.7%) patients were established on ACE inhibitors/ARBs. Despite correction for known confounders, discontinuation of ACE inhibitors/ARBs was highly predictive of worsened outcomes in COVID-19. The proportion of doses omitted in the hospital was significantly associated with increased mortality (OR, 9.59; 95% CI, 2.55-36.09; P < 0.001), maximum National Early Warning Score 2 (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.27-2.17; P < 0.001), maximum oxygen requirements (OR, 3.00; 95% CI, 1.83-4.91; P < 0.001), and maximum C-reactive protein concentration (OR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.06-3.17; P = 0.030). IMPLICATIONS: Our data show a strong association between missed ACE inhibitor/ARB doses with increased morbidity and mortality. The available evidence supports continuation of currently accepted practice surrounding ACE inhibitor/ARB therapy in acute illness, which is to limit drug omission to established acute contraindications, to actively monitor such decisions, and to restart therapy as soon as it is safe to do so. (Clin Ther. 2021;43:e97-e110) © 2021 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc.

Predicting readmission and death after hospital discharge: a comparison of conventional frailty measurement with an electronic health record-based score.

BACKGROUND: frailty measurement may identify patients at risk of decline after hospital discharge, but many measures require specialist review and/or additional testing. OBJECTIVE: to compare validated frailty tools with routine electronic health record (EHR) data at hospital discharge, for associations with readmission or death. DESIGN: observational cohort study. SETTING: hospital ward. SUBJECTS: consented cardiology inpatients ≥70 years old within 24 hours of discharge. METHODS: patients underwent Fried, Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), PRISMA-7 and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) assessments. An EHR risk score was derived from the proportion of 31 possible frailty markers present. Electronic follow-up was completed for a primary outcome of 90-day readmission or death. Secondary outcomes were mortality and days alive at home ('home time') at 12 months. RESULTS: in total, 186 patients were included (79 ± 6 years old, 64% males). The primary outcome occurred in 55 (30%) patients. Fried (hazard ratio [HR] 1.47 per standard deviation [SD] increase, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-1.81, P < 0.001), CFS (HR 1.24 per SD increase, 95% CI 1.01-1.51, P = 0.04) and EHR risk scores (HR 1.35 per SD increase, 95% CI 1.02-1.78, P = 0.04) were independently associated with the primary outcome after adjustment for age, sex and co-morbidity, but the SPPB and PRISMA-7 were not. The EHR risk score was independently associated with mortality and home time at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: frailty measurement at hospital discharge identifies patients at risk of poorer outcomes. An EHR-based risk score appeared equivalent to validated frailty tools and may be automated to screen patients at scale, but this requires further validation.