A pragmatic, stepped-wedge, hybrid type II trial of interoperable clinical decision support to improve venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for patients with traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a preventable medical condition which has substantial impact on patient morbidity, mortality, and disability. Unfortunately, adherence to the published best practices for VTE prevention, based on patient centered outcomes research (PCOR), is highly variable across U.S. hospitals, which represents a gap between current evidence and clinical practice leading to adverse patient outcomes. This gap is especially large in the case of traumatic brain injury (TBI), where reluctance to initiate VTE prevention due to concerns for potentially increasing the rates of intracranial bleeding drives poor rates of VTE prophylaxis. This is despite research which has shown early initiation of VTE prophylaxis to be safe in TBI without increased risk of delayed neurosurgical intervention or death. Clinical decision support (CDS) is an indispensable solution to close this practice gap; however, design and implementation barriers hinder CDS adoption and successful scaling across health systems. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) informed by PCOR evidence can be deployed using CDS systems to improve the evidence to practice gap. In the Scaling AcceptabLE cDs (SCALED) study, we will implement a VTE prevention CPG within an interoperable CDS system and evaluate both CPG effectiveness (improved clinical outcomes) and CDS implementation. METHODS: The SCALED trial is a hybrid type 2 randomized stepped wedge effectiveness-implementation trial to scale the CDS across 4 heterogeneous healthcare systems. Trial outcomes will be assessed using the RE2-AIM planning and evaluation framework. Efforts will be made to ensure implementation consistency. Nonetheless, it is expected that CDS adoption will vary across each site. To assess these differences, we will evaluate implementation processes across trial sites using the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) implementation framework (a determinant framework) using mixed-methods. Finally, it is critical that PCOR CPGs are maintained as evidence evolves. To date, an accepted process for evidence maintenance does not exist. We will pilot a "Living Guideline" process model for the VTE prevention CDS system. DISCUSSION: The stepped wedge hybrid type 2 trial will provide evidence regarding the effectiveness of CDS based on the Berne-Norwood criteria for VTE prevention in patients with TBI. Additionally, it will provide evidence regarding a successful strategy to scale interoperable CDS systems across U.S. healthcare systems, advancing both the fields of implementation science and health informatics. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov - NCT05628207. Prospectively registered 11/28/2022, https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT05628207 .

Development and validation of algorithms for identifying lines of therapy in multiple myeloma using real-world data.

Aim: To validate algorithms based on electronic health data to identify composition of lines of therapy (LOT) in multiple myeloma (MM). Materials & methods: This study used available electronic health data for selected adults within Henry Ford Health (Michigan, USA) newly diagnosed with MM in 2006-2017. Algorithm performance in this population was verified via chart review. As with prior oncology studies, good performance was defined as positive predictive value (PPV) ≥75%. Results: Accuracy for identifying LOT1 (N = 133) was 85.0%. For the most frequent regimens, accuracy was 92.5-97.7%, PPV 80.6-93.8%, sensitivity 88.2-89.3% and specificity 94.3-99.1%. Algorithm performance decreased in subsequent LOTs, with decreasing sample sizes. Only 19.5% of patients received maintenance therapy during LOT1. Accuracy for identifying maintenance therapy was 85.7%; PPV for the most common maintenance therapy was 73.3%. Conclusion: Algorithms performed well in identifying LOT1 - especially more commonly used regimens - and slightly less well in identifying maintenance therapy therein.

Electronic health data helps us understand treatment in the 'real world'. The data has great value in cancer if we can identify the drugs patients get. Yet this is hard in multiple myeloma (MM), where treatment is complex. Algorithms (set of decision rules) to identify drugs can help here. We tested an existing algorithm for identifying 'lines of therapy' (LOT) given to patients with MM. Each LOT included one or more drugs for MM. We also developed and tested a new algorithm for 'maintenance therapy'. This is a treatment given to help maintain the response to the main MM treatment. We tested how well the algorithms identified MM treatments in electronic health data. This data came from Henry Ford Health, a healthcare system in Michigan, USA. Treatments were confirmed by cancer specialists who reviewed medical charts. The LOT algorithm was good at finding the first LOT patients. The maintenance algorithm did a fair job of identifying the most used therapy. Our algorithms could help researchers study the real-world treatment of MM.

Assessment of clinical and economic impact of rivaroxaban plus aspirin vs. aspirin alone as a secondary prophylaxis in patients with chronic and symptomatic peripheral arterial disease in the United States.

AIM: The objective in this study was to assess the clinical and economic implications of the inclusion of rivaroxaban as a secondary prophylaxis in patients with chronic or symptomatic peripheral artery disease (PAD) in the United States (US). METHODS: A cost-consequence model was adapted to evaluate the economic impact of rivaroxaban plus aspirin in a hypothetical 1-million-member health plan. The model inputs were taken from multiple sources: efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban + aspirin vs. aspirin alone were abstracted from COMPASS and VOYAGER randomized clinical trials; the prevalence of chronic and symptomatic PAD and incidence rates of clinical events (major adverse cardiac events [MACE], major adverse limb events [MALE], and major bleeding), were abstracted from the analysis of claims data; healthcare costs of clinical events and wholesale acquisition costs for rivaroxaban were abstracted from the literature and Red Book, respectively (2022 USD). One-way sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses were also conducted. RESULTS: Over one year, with a 5% uptake of rivaroxaban, the model estimated rivaroxaban + aspirin to reduce 21 MACE/MALE events in the PAD patient population. The reduction in these clinical events offsets the increased risk of major bleeding (16 additional events), demonstrating a positive health benefit of the rivaroxaban addition. These benefits led to a $0.27 incremental cost per member per month (PMPM) to a US plan. The major driver of the incremental cost was the cost of rivaroxaban. In a subgroup of patients with the presence of any high-risk factor (heart failure, diabetes, renal insufficiency, or history of vascular disease affecting two or more vascular beds), the incremental PMPM cost was $0.13. CONCLUSIONS: Rivaroxaban + aspirin was found to provide positive net clinical benefit on the annual number of MACE/MALE avoided, with a modest increase in the PMPM cost.

Systemic Anticancer Therapy and Thromboembolic Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients With Cancer and COVID-19.

Importance: Systematic data on the association between anticancer therapies and thromboembolic events (TEEs) in patients with COVID-19 are lacking. Objective: To assess the association between anticancer therapy exposure within 3 months prior to COVID-19 and TEEs following COVID-19 diagnosis in patients with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients who were hospitalized and had active cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data were accrued from March 2020 to December 2021 and analyzed from December 2021 to October 2022. Exposure: Treatments of interest (TOIs) (endocrine therapy, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors/tyrosine kinase inhibitors [VEGFis/TKIs], immunomodulators [IMiDs], immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICIs], chemotherapy) vs reference (no systemic therapy) in 3 months prior to COVID-19. Main Outcomes and Measures: Main outcomes were (1) venous thromboembolism (VTE) and (2) arterial thromboembolism (ATE). Secondary outcome was severity of COVID-19 (rates of intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, 30-day all-cause mortality following TEEs in TOI vs reference group) at 30-day follow-up. Results: Of 4988 hospitalized patients with cancer (median [IQR] age, 69 [59-78] years; 2608 [52%] male), 1869 had received 1 or more TOIs. Incidence of VTE was higher in all TOI groups: endocrine therapy, 7%; VEGFis/TKIs, 10%; IMiDs, 8%; ICIs, 12%; and chemotherapy, 10%, compared with patients not receiving systemic therapies (6%). In multivariable log-binomial regression analyses, relative risk of VTE (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69) but not ATE (aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.56-1.16) was significantly higher in those exposed to all TOIs pooled together vs those with no exposure. Among individual drugs, ICIs were significantly associated with VTE (aRR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.01-2.07). Also noted were significant associations between VTE and active and progressing cancer (aRR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.01-2.03), history of VTE (aRR, 3.10; 95% CI, 2.38-4.04), and high-risk site of cancer (aRR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.14-1.75). Black patients had a higher risk of TEEs (aRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.03-1.50) than White patients. Patients with TEEs had high intensive care unit admission (46%) and mechanical ventilation (31%) rates. Relative risk of death in patients with TEEs was higher in those exposed to TOIs vs not (aRR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.91-1.38) and was significantly associated with poor performance status (aRR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.30-2.40) and active/progressing cancer (aRR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.13-2.13). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, relative risk of developing VTE was high among patients receiving TOIs and varied by the type of therapy, underlying risk factors, and demographics, such as race and ethnicity. These findings highlight the need for close monitoring and perhaps personalized thromboprophylaxis to prevent morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19-related thromboembolism in patients with cancer.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt-induced hemolysis in a non-cirrhotic patient: a case report.

BACKGROUND: In the 1990s, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) were performed using bare metal stents, and stent-induced hemolysis was a complication noted in 10% of patients. This was due to the mechanical stress created by turbulent flow from the uncovered interstices. Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) stents came into regular use in the early 2000s becoming the standard equipment for TIPS placements, which are predominately covered. Due to this, stent-induced hemolysis has become a rare phenomenon. CASE PRESENTATION: We describe a case of TIPS-induced hemolysis in a 53-years-old Caucasian female patient without cirrhosis. The patient had a history of heterozygous factor 5 Leiden mutation and abnormal lupus anticoagulant profile with development of a portal vein thrombus. She had undergone previous TIPS placement complicated by a TIPS thrombosis 3 years after initial placement requiring venoplasty and extension of the stent. Within one month, the patient developed hemolytic anemia with extensive evaluation that did not yield an alternative cause. Due to temporal association and clinical symptoms, the hemolytic anemia was attributed to the recent TIPS revision. CONCLUSION: This particular case of TIPS-induced hemolysis in a patient who does not have cirrhosis has not been previously described in the literature. Our case highlights that TIPS-induced hemolysis should be considered in anyone who could have potential underlying red blood cell dysfunction, not just those with cirrhosis. Further, the case demonstrates an important point that mild hemolysis (i.e., not requiring blood transfusion) can likely be managed conservatively, without stent removal.

Venous thromboembolism after COVID-19 vaccination in patients with thrombophilia.

Patients with thrombophilia remain concerned about venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk with COVID-19 vaccinations. The aim of this study was to examine VTE outcomes in patients with inherited or acquired thrombophilia who were vaccinated for COVID-19. Vaccinated patients ≥18 years between November 1, 2020 and November 1, 2021 were analyzed using electronic medical records across the Mayo Clinic enterprise. The primary outcome was imaging confirmed acute VTE occurring 90 days before and after the date of the first vaccine dose. Thrombophilia patients were identified through laboratory testing results and ICD-10 codes. A total of 792 010 patients with at least one COVID-19 vaccination were identified. Six thousand sixty-seven of these patients were found to have a thrombophilia, among whom there was a total of 39 VTE events after compared to 51 VTE events before vaccination (0.64% vs. 0.84%, p = .20). In patients with Factor V Leiden or prothrombin gene mutation, VTE occurred in 27 patients before and in 29 patients after vaccination (0.61 vs. 0.65%, p = .79). In patients with antiphospholipid syndrome, VTE occurred in six patients before and four patients after vaccination (0.59% vs. 0.39%, p = .40). No difference was observed in the overall VTE rate when comparing the postvaccination 90 days to the prevaccination 90 days, adjusted hazard ratio 0.81 (95% confidence interval: 0.53-1.23). In this subgroup of COVID-19 vaccinated patients with thrombophilia, there was no increased risk for acute VTE postvaccination compared to the prevaccination timeframe. These results are consistent with prior studies and should offer additional reassurance to patients with inherited or acquired thrombophilia.

Glucose-lowering treatment patterns in patients with diabetic kidney disease.

OBJECTIVES: Recent trials of glucose-lowering drugs (GLDs) have drawn attention to renal outcomes. Our goal was to understand how patients with diabetic kidney disease (DKD) are treated in general practices in the United States. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using a national-level claims data set and electronic health records. METHODS: Patients (≥ 18 years) with type 2 diabetes, whose estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs) were between 15 and 89 mL/min/1.73 m2 between 2016 and 2018, were selected. Use of different GLDs during a 12-month period was examined across all eGFR levels. RESULTS: Of the 25,486 sample patients, 69.2%, 18.9%, 9.6%, and 2.3% had an eGFR in the ranges of 60 to 89, 45 to 59, 30 to 44, and 15 to 29 mL/min/1.73 m2, respectively. Metformin was used by nearly 33% of patients with an eGFR of 30 to 44 mL/min/1.73 m2 and by 10% of patients with an eGFR less than 30 mL/min/1.73 m2. Less than 10% (across all eGFR levels) of patients used glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. Use of insulin was more frequent among patients with a lower eGFR (P < .05). The findings were similar in subgroups with different hemoglobin A1c levels (< 7% and ≥ 7%). CONCLUSIONS: Real-world treatment of DKD in the United States is suboptimal. Inappropriate use of some GLD classes, especially in advanced DKD stages, was found along with lower than expected use of modern agents that are considered safe and effective to treat glycemic outcomes. Efforts may be needed to improve understanding of safety, glycemic efficacy, and overall clinical value of GLDs across DKD stages.

Risk of venous thromboembolism after COVID-19 vaccination.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccinations in the United States are effective in preventing illness and hospitalization yet concern over post-vaccination venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk has led to vaccine hesitancy. METHODS: The aim of this study was to compare VTE rates before and after COVID-19 vaccination. COVID-19 vaccinated patients ≥18 years between November 1, 2020 through November 1, 2021 were analyzed using electronic medical records across the Mayo Clinic enterprise. The primary outcome was imaging confirmed acute VTE (upper or lower deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism) occurring 90 days before and after the date of first vaccine dose. RESULTS: A total of 792 010 patients with at least one COVID-19 vaccination were identified (Pfizer, n = 452 950, Moderna, n = 290 607, and Janssen [Johnson & Johnson], n = 48 453). A total of 1565 VTE events occurred in the 90 days before (n = 772) and after (n = 793) COVID-19 vaccination. VTE post-vaccination occurred in 326 patients receiving Moderna (0.11%, incidence rate [IR] 4.58 per 1000p-years), 425 patients receiving Pfizer (0.09%, IR 3.84 per 1000p-years), and 42 receiving Janssen (0.09%, IR 3.56 per 1000p-years). Compared to the pre-vaccination timeframe, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for VTE after the Janssen vaccination was 0.97 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-1.50), aHR 1.02 (95% CI 0.87-1.19) for Moderna, and aHR 1.00 (95% CI 0.87-1.15) for Pfizer. CONCLUSION: In this large cohort of COVID-19 vaccinated patients, no increased risk for acute VTE post-vaccination was identified for the authorized vaccines in the United States.

Complications of Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemia.

Autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AHIA) is the group of acquired autoimmune conditions resulting from the development of autologous antibodies directed against autologous red blood cell antigens resulting in red cell lysis. Beyond the presence, severity, and duration of hemolysis which can lead to symptomatic anemia, additional complications at presentation and during treatment require a high degree of clinical vigilance. These include among others cutaneous, thrombotic, renal disorders, and infectious disorders. Complications can be due to the presence of the pathologic antibody itself, the process of hemolysis, or attributed to treatment. Comprehensive management of AIHA requires awareness and assessment of complications at diagnosis, during, and following treatment.

Learning through a Pandemic: The Current State of Knowledge on COVID-19 and Cancer.

The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has left patients with current or past history of cancer facing disparate consequences at every stage of the cancer trajectory. This comprehensive review offers a landscape analysis of the current state of the literature on COVID-19 and cancer, including the immune response to COVID-19, risk factors for severe disease, and impact of anticancer therapies. We also review the latest data on treatment of COVID-19 and vaccination safety and efficacy in patients with cancer, as well as the impact of the pandemic on cancer care, including the urgent need for rapid evidence generation and real-world study designs. SIGNIFICANCE: Patients with cancer have faced severe consequences at every stage of the cancer journey due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This comprehensive review offers a landscape analysis of the current state of the field regarding COVID-19 and cancer. We cover the immune response, risk factors for severe disease, and implications for vaccination in patients with cancer, as well as the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care delivery. Overall, this review provides an in-depth summary of the key issues facing patients with cancer during this unprecedented health crisis.

SMART COVID Navigator, a Clinical Decision Support Tool for COVID-19 Treatment: Design and Development Study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2 has infected 219 million individuals at the time of writing of this paper. A large volume of research findings from observational studies about disease interactions with COVID-19 is being produced almost daily, making it difficult for physicians to keep track of the latest information on COVID-19's effect on patients with certain pre-existing conditions. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we describe the creation of a clinical decision support tool, the SMART COVID Navigator, a web application to assist clinicians in treating patients with COVID-19. Our application allows clinicians to access a patient's electronic health records and identify disease interactions from a large set of observational research studies that affect the severity and fatality due to COVID-19. METHODS: The SMART COVID Navigator takes a 2-pronged approach to clinical decision support. The first part is a connection to electronic health record servers, allowing the application to access a patient's medical conditions. The second is accessing data sets with information from various observational studies to determine the latest research findings about COVID-19 outcomes for patients with certain medical conditions. By connecting these 2 data sources, users can see how a patient's medical history will affect their COVID-19 outcomes. RESULTS: The SMART COVID Navigator aggregates patient health information from multiple Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources-enabled electronic health record systems. This allows physicians to see a comprehensive view of patient health records. The application accesses 2 data sets of over 1100 research studies to provide information on the fatality and severity of COVID-19 for several pre-existing conditions. We also analyzed the results of the collected studies to determine which medical conditions result in an increased chance of severity and fatality of COVID-19 progression. We found that certain conditions result in a higher likelihood of severity and fatality probabilities. We also analyze various cancer tissues and find that the probabilities for fatality vary greatly depending on the tissue being examined. CONCLUSIONS: The SMART COVID Navigator allows physicians to predict the fatality and severity of COVID-19 progression given a particular patient's medical conditions. This can allow physicians to determine how aggressively to treat patients infected with COVID-19 and to prioritize different patients for treatment considering their prior medical conditions.

Responding to COVID-19 Through Interhospital Resource Coordination: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic stressed hospital operations, requiring rapid innovations to address rise in demand and specialized COVID-19 services while maintaining access to hospital-based care and facilitating expertise. We aimed to describe a novel hospital system approach to managing the COVID-19 pandemic, including multihospital coordination capability and transfer of COVID-19 patients to a single, dedicated hospital. METHODS: We included patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction admitted to a 12-hospital network including a dedicated COVID-19 hospital. Our primary outcome was adherence to local guidelines, including admission risk stratification, anticoagulation, and dexamethasone treatment assessed by differences-in-differences analysis after guideline dissemination. We evaluated outcomes and health care worker satisfaction. Finally, we assessed barriers to safe transfer including transfer across different electronic health record systems. RESULTS: During the study, the system admitted a total of 1209 patients. Of these, 56.3% underwent transfer, supported by a physician-led System Operations Center. Patients who were transferred were older (P = 0.001) and had similar risk-adjusted mortality rates. Guideline adherence after dissemination was higher among patients who underwent transfer: admission risk stratification (P < 0.001), anticoagulation (P < 0.001), and dexamethasone administration (P = 0.003). Transfer across electronic health record systems was a perceived barrier to safety and reduced quality. Providers positively viewed our transfer approach. CONCLUSIONS: With standardized communication, interhospital transfers can be a safe and effective method of cohorting COVID-19 patients, are well received by health care providers, and have the potential to improve care quality.

Incidence of urinary tract infection following initiation of intermittent catheterization among patients with recent spinal cord injury in Germany and the Netherlands.

Objective: To assess incidence of urinary tract infection (UTI) among patients with recent spinal cord injury (SCI) who initiated intermittent catheterization (IC).Design: Retrospective chart review.Setting: Two European SCI rehabilitation centers.Participants: Seventy-three consecutive patients with recent SCI who initiated IC.Outcome measures: Incidence of UTI, using six different definitions, each based on microbiology ± symptomatology ± mention of UTI . Rates were expressed in terms of numbers of UTIs per 100 patient-months (PMs). Attention was focused on first-noted UTI during the three-month follow-up, as assessed with each of the six definitions.Results: Fifty-eight percent of patients (n = 33) met ≥1 definitions for UTI during follow-up (rate: 31.5 UTIs per 100 PMs), ranging from 14% (5.3 per 100 PMs; definition requiring bacteriuria, pyuria, and presence of symptoms) to 45% (22.7 per 100 PMs; definition requiring "mention of UTI"). Ten cases were identified using the definition that required bacteriuria, pyuria, and symptoms, whereas definitions that required bacteriuria and either pyuria or symptoms resulted in the identification of 20-25 cases. Median time to UTI ranged from 42 days ("mention of UTI") to 81 days (definition requiring bacteriuria and ≥100 leukocytes/mm3).Conclusion: Depending on definition, 14% to 45% of patients with recent SCI experience UTI within three months of initiating IC. Definitions requiring bacteriuria and either pyuria or symptoms consistently identified about twice as many cases as those that required all three conditions. Standardizing definitions may help improve detection, treatment, and prevention of UTI within this vulnerable population.

Implementation of an Anticoagulation Practice Guideline for COVID-19 via a Clinical Decision Support System in a Large Academic Health System and Its Evaluation: Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating strategies for the rapid development, implementation, and evaluation of clinical decision support (CDS) systems supporting guidelines for diseases with a poor knowledge base, such as COVID-19, are limited. OBJECTIVE: We developed an anticoagulation clinical practice guideline (CPG) for COVID-19, which was delivered and scaled via CDS across a 12-hospital Midwest health care system. This study represents a preplanned 6-month postimplementation evaluation guided by the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) framework. METHODS: The implementation outcomes evaluated were reach, adoption, implementation, and maintenance. To evaluate effectiveness, the association of CPG adherence on hospital admission with clinical outcomes was assessed via multivariable logistic regression and nearest neighbor propensity score matching. A time-to-event analysis was conducted. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted to evaluate the competing risk of death prior to intensive care unit (ICU) admission. The models were risk adjusted to account for age, gender, race/ethnicity, non-English speaking status, area deprivation index, month of admission, remdesivir treatment, tocilizumab treatment, steroid treatment, BMI, Elixhauser comorbidity index, oxygen saturation/fraction of inspired oxygen ratio, systolic blood pressure, respiratory rate, treating hospital, and source of admission. A preplanned subgroup analysis was also conducted in patients who had laboratory values (D-dimer, C-reactive protein, creatinine, and absolute neutrophil to absolute lymphocyte ratio) present. The primary effectiveness endpoint was the need for ICU admission within 48 hours of hospital admission. RESULTS: A total of 2503 patients were included in this study. CDS reach approached 95% during implementation. Adherence achieved a peak of 72% during implementation. Variation was noted in adoption across sites and nursing units. Adoption was the highest at hospitals that were specifically transformed to only provide care to patients with COVID-19 (COVID-19 cohorted hospitals; 74%-82%) and the lowest in academic settings (47%-55%). CPG delivery via the CDS system was associated with improved adherence (odds ratio [OR] 1.43, 95% CI 1.2-1.7; P<.001). Adherence with the anticoagulation CPG was associated with a significant reduction in the need for ICU admission within 48 hours (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.30-0.51; P<.001) on multivariable logistic regression analysis. Similar findings were noted following 1:1 propensity score matching for patients who received adherent versus nonadherent care (21.5% vs 34.3% incidence of ICU admission within 48 hours; log-rank test P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our institutional experience demonstrated that adherence with the institutional CPG delivered via the CDS system resulted in improved clinical outcomes for patients with COVID-19. CDS systems are an effective means to rapidly scale a CPG across a heterogeneous health care system. Further research is needed to investigate factors associated with adherence at low and high adopting sites and nursing units.

Outpatient and inpatient anticoagulation therapy and the risk for hospital admission and death among COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with a hypercoagulable state. Limited data exist informing the relationship between anticoagulation therapy and risk for COVID-19 related hospitalization and mortality. METHODS: We evaluated all patients over the age of 18 diagnosed with COVID-19 in a prospective cohort study from March 4th to August 27th, 2020 among 12 hospitals and 60 clinics of M Health Fairview system (USA). We investigated the relationship between (1) 90-day anticoagulation therapy among outpatients before COVID-19 diagnosis and the risk for hospitalization and mortality and (2) Inpatient anticoagulation therapy and mortality risk. FINDINGS: Of 6195 patients, 598 were immediately hospitalized and 5597 were treated as outpatients. The overall case-fatality rate was 2•8% (n = 175 deaths). Among the patients who were hospitalized, the inpatient mortality was 13%. Among the 5597 COVID-19 patients initially treated as outpatients, 160 (2.9%) were on anticoagulation and 331 were eventually hospitalized (5.9%). In a multivariable analysis, outpatient anticoagulation use was associated with a 43% reduction in risk for hospital admission, HR (95% CI = 0.57, 0.38-0.86), p = 0.007, but was not associated with mortality, HR (95% CI=0.88, 0.50 - 1.52), p = 0.64. Inpatients who were not on anticoagulation (before or after hospitalization) had an increased risk for mortality, HR (95% CI = 2.26, 1.17-4.37), p = 0.015. INTERPRETATION: Outpatients with COVID-19 who were on outpatient anticoagulation at the time of diagnosis experienced a 43% reduced risk of hospitalization. Failure to initiate anticoagulation upon hospitalization or maintaining outpatient anticoagulation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients was associated with increased mortality risk. FUNDING: No funding was obtained for this study.

Metformin and Covid-19: Focused Review of Mechanisms and Current Literature Suggesting Benefit.

Metformin is the first-line medication for type 2 diabetes, but it also has a long history of improved outcomes in infectious diseases, such as influenza, hepatitis C, and in-vitro assays of zika. In the current Covid-19 pandemic, which has rapidly spread throughout the world, 4 observational studies have been published showing reduced mortality among individuals with home metformin use. There are several potential overlapping mechanisms by which metformin may reduce mortality from Covid-19. Metformin's past anti-infectious benefits have been both against the infectious agent directly, as well as by improving the underlying health of the human host. It is unknown if the lower mortality suggested by observational studies in patients infected with Covid-19 who are on home metformin is due to direct activity against the virus itself, improved host substrate, or both.