Impact of Digital Health Technology on Quality of Life in Patients With Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Digital health tools may improve quality of life (QoL) in patients with heart failure (HF) by promoting self-care, knowledge, and engagement. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluates the effect of 3 digital technologies on QoL in patients with HF. METHODS: A total of 182 patients were randomized to usual care or one of the technologies promoting self-care: Bodyport (cardiac scale), Conversa (conversational platform), or Noom (smartphone application). The primary outcome was 90-day change in QoL, as assessed by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) Overall Summary Score (OSS). RESULTS: A total of 151 participants (83%) completed their 90-day surveys. The median age of enrolled participants was 61 years (IQR: 53-69 years), and 37.9% were women. No group had any significant change in KCCQ OSS or improvement relative to usual care. However, symptoms and physical function at 90 days, as assessed by the Total Symptom Score (TSS) and Clinical Summary Score (CSS), were significantly improved in the Noom group relative to usual care: TSS median change of +4.2 points (IQR -1 to +16.7) vs -1 points (IQR: -13.5 to +7.8; P = 0.006); CSS median change of +2.8 points (IQR: -1 to +14.6) vs -3.1 points (IQR: -10.2 to +3; P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Three digital interventions showed no independent effect on QoL as assessed by the KCCQ OSS. However, participants randomized to the Noom technology demonstrated improved KCCQ TSS and CSS relative to usual care. Although digital tools may be an important component of longitudinal care for patients with HF, larger studies are needed to better understand their effectiveness and optimal deployment. (Evaluating Efficacy of Digital Health Technology in the Treatment of Congestive Heart Failure; NCT04394754).

The Association of COVID-19 With Acute Kidney Injury Independent of Severity of Illness: A Multicenter Cohort Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Although coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been associated with acute kidney injury (AKI), it is unclear whether this association is independent of traditional risk factors such as hypotension, nephrotoxin exposure, and inflammation. We tested the independent association of COVID-19 with AKI. STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, observational, cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Patients admitted to 1 of 6 hospitals within the Yale New Haven Health System between March 10, 2020, and August 31, 2020, with results for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing via polymerase chain reaction of a nasopharyngeal sample. EXPOSURE: Positive test for SARS-CoV-2. OUTCOME: AKI by KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) criteria. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Evaluated the association of COVID-19 with AKI after controlling for time-invariant factors at admission (eg, demographic characteristics, comorbidities) and time-varying factors updated continuously during hospitalization (eg, vital signs, medications, laboratory results, respiratory failure) using time-updated Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Of the 22,122 patients hospitalized, 2,600 tested positive and 19,522 tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. Compared with patients who tested negative, patients with COVID-19 had more AKI (30.6% vs 18.2%; absolute risk difference, 12.5% [95% CI, 10.6%-14.3%]) and dialysis-requiring AKI (8.5% vs 3.6%) and lower rates of recovery from AKI (58% vs 69.8%). Compared with patients without COVID-19, patients with COVID-19 had higher inflammatory marker levels (C-reactive protein, ferritin) and greater use of vasopressors and diuretic agents. Compared with patients without COVID-19, patients with COVID-19 had a higher rate of AKI in univariable analysis (hazard ratio, 1.84 [95% CI, 1.73-1.95]). In a fully adjusted model controlling for demographic variables, comorbidities, vital signs, medications, and laboratory results, COVID-19 remained associated with a high rate of AKI (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.29-1.53]). LIMITATIONS: Possibility of residual confounding. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 is associated with high rates of AKI not fully explained by adjustment for known risk factors. This suggests the presence of mechanisms of AKI not accounted for in this analysis, which may include a direct effect of COVID-19 on the kidney or other unmeasured mediators. Future studies should evaluate the possible unique pathways by which COVID-19 may cause AKI.

A Comparison Study of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outcomes in Hospitalized Kidney Transplant Recipients.

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can infect any human host, but kidney transplant recipients (KTR) are considered more susceptible on the basis of previous experience with other viral infections. We evaluated rates of hospital complications between SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR and comparator groups. Methods: We extracted data from the electronic health record on patients who were hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2, testing at six hospitals from March 4 through September 9, 2020. We compared outcomes between SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR and controls: SARS-CoV-2-positive non-KTR, SARS-CoV-2-negative KTR, and SARS-CoV-2-negative non-KTR. Results: Of 31,540 inpatients, 3213 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. There were 32 SARS-CoV-2-positive and 224 SARS-CoV-2-negative KTR. SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR had higher ferritin levels (1412; interquartile range, 748-1749 versus 553; interquartile range, 256-1035; P<0.01) compared with SARS-CoV-2-positive non-KTR. SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR had higher rates of ventilation (34% versus 14%, P<0.01; versus 9%, P<0.01; versus 5%, P<0.01), vasopressor use (41% versus 16%, P<0.01; versus 17%, P<0.01; versus 12%, P<0.01), and AKI (47% versus 15%, P<0.01; versus 23%, P<0.01; versus 10%, P<0.01) compared with SARS-CoV-2-positive non-KTR, SARS-CoV-2-negative KTR, and SARS-CoV-2-negative non-KTR, respectively. SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR continued to have increased odds of ventilation, vasopressor use, and AKI compared with SARS-CoV-2-positive non-KTR independent of Elixhauser score, Black race, and baseline eGFR. Mortality was not significantly different between SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR and non-KTR, but there was a notable trend toward higher mortality in SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR (25% versus 16%, P=0.15, respectively). Conclusions: Hospitalized SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR had a high rate of mortality and hospital complications, such as requiring ventilation, vasopressor use, and AKI. Additionally, they had higher odds of hospital complications compared with SARS-CoV-2-positive non-KTR after adjusting for Elixhauser score, Black race, and baseline eGFR. Future studies with larger sample size of KTR are needed to validate our findings. Podcast: This article contains a podcast at https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/K360/2021_03_25_KID0005652020.mp3.