Covid-19, non-Covid-19 and excess mortality rates not comparable across countries.

Evidence that more people in some countries and fewer in others are dying because of the pandemic, than is reflected by reported coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) mortality rates, is derived from mortality data. Using publicly available databases, deaths attributed to Covid-19 in 2020 and all deaths for the years 2015-2020 were tabulated for 35 countries together with economic, health, demographic and government response stringency index variables. Residual mortality rates (RMR) in 2020 were calculated as excess mortality minus reported mortality rates due to Covid-19 where excess deaths were observed deaths in 2020 minus the average for 2015-2019. Differences in RMR are differences not attributed to reported Covid-19. For about half the countries, RMR's were negative and for half, positive. The absolute rates in some countries were double those in others. In a regression analysis, population density and proportion of female smokers were positively associated with both Covid-19 and excess mortality while the human development index and proportion of male smokers were negatively associated with both. RMR was not associated with any of the investigated variables. The results show that published data on mortality from Covid-19 cannot be directly comparable across countries. This may be due to differences in Covid-19 death reporting and in addition, the unprecedented public health measures implemented to control the pandemic may have produced either increased or reduced excess deaths due to other diseases. Further data on cause-specific mortality is required to determine the extent to which residual mortality represents non-Covid-19 deaths and to explain differences between countries.

Body piercing in England: a survey of piercing at sites other than earlobe.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of body piercing, other than of earlobes, in the general adult population in England, and to describe the distribution of body piercing by age group, sex, social class, anatomical site, and who performed the piercings. To estimate the proportion of piercings that resulted in complications and the proportion of piercings that resulted in professional help being sought after the piercing. DESIGN: Cross sectional household survey. SETTING: All regions of England 2005. PARTICIPANTS: 10,503 adults aged 16 and over identified with a two stage selection process: random selection of geographical areas and filling predefined quotas of individuals. Results weighted to reflect the national demographic profile of adults aged 16 and over. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Estimates of the prevalence of body piercing overall and by age group, sex, and anatomical site. Estimates, in those aged 16-24, of the proportion of piercings associated with complications and the seeking of professional help. RESULTS: The prevalence of body piercing was 1049/10,503 (10%, 95% confidence interval 9.4% to 10.6%). Body piercing was more common in women than in men and in younger age groups. Nearly half the women aged 16-24 reported having had a piercing (305/659, 46.2%, 42.0% to 50.5%). Of the 754 piercings in those aged 16-24, complications were reported with 233 (31.0%, 26.8% to 35.5%); professional help was sought with 115 (15.2%, 11.8% to 19.5%); and hospital admission was required with seven (0.9%, 0.3% to 3.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Body piercing is common in adults in England, particularly in young women. Problems are common and the assistance of health services is often required. Though serious complications requiring admission to hospital seem uncommon, the popularity of the practice might place a substantial burden on health services.

Hospital-acquired, laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection: increased hospital stay and direct costs.

OBJECTIVES: To determine increased hospital stay and direct costs attributable to hospital-acquired, laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection (BSI), and to evaluate the matching variable length of stay (LOS). DESIGN: Retrospective (historical) cohort study with 1:2 matching in intensive care units and surgical wards. SETTING: A 2,000-bed university hospital in Rome, Italy. PATIENTS: All patients admitted between January 1994 and June 1995 who had hospital-acquired, laboratory-confirmed BSI were considered cases; all others were eligible as controls. METHODS: Two controls (A and B) were selected per case in a stepwise fashion. Controls in group A were selected according to the following six criteria: ward, gender, age, diagnosis, central venous catheter, and LOS equal to the interval from admission to infection in a matched case +/- 20% (LOS +/- 20%). Controls in group B were selected according to the first five criteria, but excluded LOS +/- 20%. RESULTS: One hundred five of 108 patients were each matched with two controls. The matching appropriateness score was greater than 90%. With the use of controls in groups A and B, the case-fatality rates attributable to hospital-acquired, laboratory-confirmed BSI were 35.2% and 40.9%, respectively; the estimated risk ratios for death were 2.60 and 3.52 (P = .0001), respectively. The increased hospital stay per case attributable to hospital-acquired, laboratory-confirmed BSI was 19.1 (mean) and 13.0 (median) days for matched pairs in control group A and 19.9 (mean) and 15.0 (median) days for matched pairs in control group B. With controls in group A, the cost of increased hospital stay per patient attributable to hospital-acquired, laboratory-confirmed BSI was Euro 15,413. The additional cost per patient due to treatment was Euro 943, making the overall direct cost Euro 16,356 per case. CONCLUSIONS: This study should make it possible to estimate the cost of hospital-acquired, laboratory-confirmed BSI in most hospitals after adjusting for incidence rate. It also confirmed the use of LOS +/- 20% as a matching variable to limit overestimation of increased hospital stay. To our knowledge, this is among the first such studies in Europe.