The interplay between infection risk factors of SARS-CoV-2 and mortality: a cross-sectional study from a cohort of long-term care nursing home residents.

BACKGROUND: Covid-19 pandemic has particularly affected older people living in Long-term Care settings in terms of infection and mortality. METHODS: We carried out a cross-sectional analysis within a cohort of Long-term care nursing home residents between March first and June thirty, 2020, who were ≥ 65 years old and on whom at least one PCR test was performed. Socio-demographic, comorbidities, and clinical data were recorded. Facility size and community incidence of SARS-CoV-2 were also considered. The outcomes of interest were infection (PCR positive) and death. RESULTS: A total of 8021 residents were included from 168 facilities. Mean age was 86.4 years (SD = 7.4). Women represented 74.1%. SARS-CoV-2 infection was detected in 27.7% of participants, and the overall case fatality rate was 11.3% (24.9% among those with a positive PCR test). Epidemiological factors related to risk of infection were larger facility size (pooled aOR 1.73; P < .001), higher community incidence (pooled aOR 1.67, P = .04), leading to a higher risk than the clinical factor of low level of functional dependence (aOR 1.22, P = .03). Epidemiological risk factors associated with mortality were male gender (aOR 1.75; P < .001), age (pooled aOR 1.16; P < .001), and higher community incidence (pooled aOR 1.19, P = < 0.001) whereas clinical factors were low level of functional dependence (aOR 2.42, P < .001), Complex Chronic Condition (aOR 1.29, P < .001) and dementia (aOR 1.33, P <0.001). There was evidence of clustering for facility and health area when considering the risk of infection and mortality (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a complex interplay between structural and individual factors regarding Covid-19 infection and its impact on mortality in nursing-home residents.

A retrospective cohort study of risk factors for mortality among nursing homes exposed to COVID-19 in Spain.

Long-term care (LTC) facilities have shown remarkably high mortality rates during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in many countries1, and different risk factors for mortality have been identified in this setting2-5. Using facilities as the unit of analysis, we investigated multiple variables covering facility characteristics and socioeconomic characteristics of the geographic location to identify risk factors for excess mortality from a comprehensive perspective. Furthermore, we used a clustering approach to detect patterns in datasets and generate hypotheses regarding potential relationships between types of nursing homes and mortality trends. Our retrospective analysis included 167 nursing homes providing LTC to 8,716 residents during the COVID-19 outbreak in Catalonia (northeast Spain). According to multiple regression analysis, COVID-19-related and overall mortality at the facility level were significantly associated with a higher percentage of patients with complex diseases, lower scores on pandemic preparedness measures and higher population incidence of COVID-19 in the surrounding population. When grouping nursing homes into eight clusters based on common features, we found higher mortality rates in four clusters, mainly characterized by a higher proportion of residents with complex chronic conditions or advanced diseases, lower scores on pandemic preparedness, being located in rural areas and larger capacity, respectively.

Estudio cuasi experimental de una intervención sobre el manejo farmacológico del dolor crónico no oncológico en atención primaria / Quasi-experimental study of an intervention on the pharmacological management of non-oncological chronic pain in Primary Care

OBJETIVO: Analizar el impacto de una intervención formativa/informativa sobre el tratamiento del dolor crónico no oncológico en atención primaria. DISEÑO: Estudio cuasi experimental antes-después y seguimiento de la cohorte de pacientes. Emplazamiento: Sesenta y cuatro equipos de atención primaria (770 médicos). PARTICIPANTES: Pacientes ≥ 14 años sin diagnóstico oncológico con: 1) fentanilo citrato, 2) opioides mayores y ≥ 2 ansiolíticos-hipnóticos, 3) opioides mayores y menores de forma crónica, 4) lidocaína transdérmica fuera de indicación. Intervención: Difusión de recomendaciones del tratamiento del dolor crónico no oncológico y facilitación de las incidencias de sus pacientes a cada médico. MEDICIONES PRINCIPALES: Números de incidencias en 2 cortes transversales (junio 2017 y junio 2018). Número de incidencias en junio de 2017 y que se mantienen en junio de 2018 (cohorte prospectiva). RESULTADOS: De las 2.465 incidencias detectadas en 2017 se produjo una reducción del 21,1% tras la intervención. La reducción fue superior (61,8%; p ≤ 0,0001) en la cohorte prospectiva. En números absolutos, la reducción más importante fue en incidencias de parches de lidocaína fuera de indicación (1.032 incidencias). La indicación aprobada constaba en menos del 8% de los tratados. CONCLUSIONES: La intervención redujo el número de pacientes con incidencias y la disminución fue mayor en la cohorte prospectiva, lo que confirma la eficacia de enviar información sobre pacientes con incidencias. La incorporación de nuevos tratamientos durante el año de seguimiento ha sido importante, por lo que estas intervenciones deben perpetuarse en el tiempo

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the impact of a formative / informative intervention on the treatment of non-oncological chronic pain in Primary Care. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental study before-after, and follow-up of the patient cohort. LOCATION: 64 Primary Care teams/centres (770 physicians). PARTICIPANTS: Patients ≥ 14 years without an oncological diagnosis on: 1) fentanyl citrate, 2) major opioids and ≥ 2 anxiolytics-hypnotics, 3) long-term major and minor opioids, 4) transdermal lidocaine, out of indication. Intervention: Dissemination of recommendations for the treatment of non-oncological chronic pain and the reporting of the incidents of their patients to each doctor. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Number of incidents in 2 cross sections (June 2017 and June 2018). Number of incidents in June 2017, which were maintained in June 2018 (prospective cohort). RESULTS: Of the 2,465 incidents detected in 2017, there was a 21.1% reduction after the intervention. The reduction was higher (61.8%, p < .001) in the prospective cohort. In absolute values, the most important reduction was in incidences of lidocaine patches outside of indication (1,032 incidences). The approved indication was found in less than 8% of the treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention reduced the number of patients with incidences, and this reduction was higher in the prospective cohort, confirming the efficacy of sending information about patients with incidences to their physicians. The incorporation of new treatments during the follow-up year was significant, so these interventions should be perpetuated over time

[Quasi-experimental study of an intervention on the pharmacological management of non-oncological chronic pain in Primary Care]. / Estudio cuasi experimental de una intervención sobre el manejo farmacológico del dolor crónico no oncológico en atención primaria.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the impact of a formative / informative intervention on the treatment of non-oncological chronic pain in Primary Care. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental study before-after, and follow-up of the patient cohort. LOCATION: 64 Primary Care teams/centres (770 physicians). PARTICIPANTS: Patients≥14 years without an oncological diagnosis on: 1) fentanyl citrate, 2) major opioids and≥2 anxiolytics-hypnotics, 3) long-term major and minor opioids, 4) transdermal lidocaine, out of indication. INTERVENTION: Dissemination of recommendations for the treatment of non-oncological chronic pain and the reporting of the incidents of their patients to each doctor. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Number of incidents in 2 cross sections (June 2017 and June 2018). Number of incidents in June 2017, which were maintained in June 2018 (prospective cohort). RESULTS: Of the 2,465 incidents detected in 2017, there was a 21.1% reduction after the intervention. The reduction was higher (61.8%, p<.001) in the prospective cohort. In absolute values, the most important reduction was in incidences of lidocaine patches outside of indication (1,032 incidences). The approved indication was found in less than 8% of the treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention reduced the number of patients with incidences, and this reduction was higher in the prospective cohort, confirming the efficacy of sending information about patients with incidences to their physicians. The incorporation of new treatments during the follow-up year was significant, so these interventions should be perpetuated over time.