Search

Since the onset of the coronavirus disease, COVID-19 pandemic, concern arose for those who might be at higher risk of a worse COVID-19 prognosis, such as those with cystic fibrosis (CF). In this context, we evaluated the features of hospitalized patients with CF due to severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) in Brazil and we also performed a systematic review including all the studies published from the beginning of the first case of COVID-19 (17 November 2019) to the date of this search (23 May 2022) which included, concomitantly, patients with CF and COVID-19 in the worldwide population. In our Brazilian data, we evaluated the period from December 2019 to March 2022, and we included 33 demographical and clinical patients' features. We classified the patients into groups: (G1) SARI due to another viral infection than severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (23; 5.4%), (G2) SARI due to an unknown etiological agent (286; 67.1%), and (G3) SARI due to SARS-CoV-2 infection (117; 27.5%). The individuals in G3 tended to be older, especially over 50 years old, and presented a higher prevalence of dyspnea, peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO2) <95%, and cardiopathy. The highest prevalence for intensive care unit (ICU) treatment (52; 44.4%) and invasive mechanical ventilation (29; 24.8%) was for patients in G3. Almost half of the patients in G3 died (51; 43.6%); in contrast, none in G1 died. However, we observed 43 (15.0%) deaths in G2. In addition, 12 (4.2%) and one (0.9%) death not associated with SARI occurred, respectively, in the G2 and G3. The patients who died due to SARS-CoV-2 infection had a higher frequency of SpO2 <95% (46; 90.2%), ICU treatment (34; 66.7%), and invasive mechanical ventilation (27; 52.9%) when compared to those who recovered. The systematic review comprised a total of 31 papers published as observational studies. These studies comprised 661,386 patients in total, including children, adults, and elderly age groups. However, only 19,150 (2.9%) patients were diagnosed with CF and, from these patients, 2523 (0.4%) were diagnosed with both CF and COVID-19. It was observed that the most common outcome was the need for hospitalization (n = 322 patients with CF), and the need for oxygen support (n = 139 patients with CF). One hundred patients with CF needed intensive care units, fifty patients needed non-invasive mechanical ventilation support, and only three patients were described as receiving invasive mechanical ventilation support. Deaths were described in 38 patients with CF. Importantly, lung-transplanted patients with CF represented an increased risk of death in one publication; in accordance, another study described that lung transplantation and moderate to severe lung disease were independent risk factors for severe outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection. In contrast with the literature, in conclusion, Brazilian patients in G3 presented a severe phenotype, even though most of the other studies did not observe worse outcomes in patients with CF and COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Covid-19 pandemic has exposed the difficulty of the US public health system to respond effectively to vulnerable subpopulations, causing disproportionate rates of morbidity and mortality. New York Haredi-Orthodox Jewish communities represent a group that have been heavily impacted by Covid-19. Little research has examined their experience or perceptions toward Covid-19 and vaccines. We conducted a cross-sectional, observational study to explore the experience of Covid-19 among Haredim. Paper surveys were self-administered between December 2020 and January 2021 in Haredi neighborhood pediatricians' offices in Brooklyn, New York. Of 102 respondents, 43% reported either a positive SARS-CoV-2 viral or antibody test. Participants trusted their physicians, Orthodox medical organizations, and rabbinic leaders for medical information. Knowledge of Covid-19 transmission and risk was good (69% answered ≥ 4/6 questions correctly). Only 12% of respondents would accept a Covid-19 vaccine, 41% were undecided and 47% were strongly hesitant. Independent predictors of strong vaccine hesitancy included believing natural infection to be better than vaccination for developing immunity (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.28; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23–14.86), agreement that prior infection provides a path toward resuming communal life (aOR 4.10; 95% CI 1.22–13.77), and pandemic-related loss of trust in physicians (aOR 5.01; 95% CI 1.05–23.96). The primary disseminators of health information for self-protective religious communities should be stakeholders who understand these groups' unique health needs. In communities with significant Covid-19 experience, vaccination messaging may need to be tailored toward protecting infection-naïve individuals and boosting natural immunity against emerging variants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Successful Aging after Elective Surgery (SAGES) II study was designed to increase knowledge of the pathophysiology and linkages between delirium and dementia. We examine novel biomarkers potentially associated with delirium, including inflammation, Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology and neurodegeneration, neuroimaging markers, and neurophysiologic markers. The goal of this paper is to describe the study design and methods for the SAGES II study. Methods: The SAGES II study is a 5‐year prospective observational study of 400–420 community dwelling persons, aged 65 years and older, assessed prior to scheduled surgery and followed daily throughout hospitalization to observe for development of delirium and other clinical outcomes. Delirium is measured with the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM), long form, after cognitive testing. Cognitive function is measured with a detailed neuropsychologic test battery, summarized as a weighted composite, the General Cognitive Performance (GCP) score. Other key measures include magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)/electroencephalography (EEG), and Amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) imaging. We describe the eligibility criteria, enrollment flow, timing of assessments, and variables collected at baseline and during repeated assessments at 1, 2, 6, 12, and 18 months. Results: This study describes the hospital and surgery‐related variables, delirium, long‐term cognitive decline, clinical outcomes, and novel biomarkers. In inter‐rater reliability assessments, the CAM ratings (weighted kappa = 0.91, 95% confidence interval, CI = 0.74–1.0) in 50 paired assessments and GCP ratings (weighted kappa = 0.99, 95% CI 0.94–1.0) in 25 paired assessments. We describe procedures for data quality assurance and Covid‐19 adaptations. Conclusions: This complex study presents an innovative effort to advance our understanding of the inter‐relationship between delirium and dementia via novel biomarkers, collected in the context of major surgery in older adults. Strengths include the integration of MRI, TMS/EEG, PET modalities, and high‐quality longitudinal data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The persistence of symptoms for more than three months following infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is referred to as "Long COVID". To gain a deeper understanding of the etiology and long-term progression of symptoms, this study aims to analyze the prevalence of Long COVID and its associated factors in a cohort of Brazilian adults and elders, twelve months after hospital discharge. An observational, prospective, and follow-up study was performed with a cohort of adults and older adults diagnosed with COVID-19 in 2020 in the State of Paraná, Brazil. Twelve months after hospital discharge, patients answered a phone questionnaire about the persistence of symptoms after three levels of exposure to COVID-19's acute phase (ambulatory, medical ward, and intensive care unit). According to the characteristics of participants, the prevalence of Long COVID-19 was calculated, and logistic regression analyses were conducted. We analyzed data from 1822 participants (980 adults [≥18–<60 years] and 842 older people [≥60 years]) across three exposure levels. The overall Long COVID prevalence was 64.2%. Long COVID was observed in 646 adults (55%; of which 326 were women) and 523 older people (45%; of which 284 were women). Females had a higher prevalence of long-term symptoms (52%) compared with men. The most common post-COVID-19 conditions in the 12-month follow-up were neurological (49.8%), followed by musculoskeletal (35.1%) and persistent respiratory symptoms (26.5%). Male individuals were less likely to develop Long COVID (aOR = 0.50). Other determinants were also considered risky, such as the presence of comorbidities (aOR = 1.41). Being an adult and having been hospitalized was associated with the development of Long COVID. The risk of developing Long COVID was twice as high for ward patients (aOR = 2.53) and three times as high for ICU patients (aOR = 3.56) when compared to non-hospitalized patients. Presenting clinical manifestations of digestive (aOR = 1.56), endocrine (aOR = 2.14), cutaneous (aOR = 2.51), musculoskeletal (aOR = 2.76) and psychological systems (aOR = 1.66) made adults more likely to develop Long COVID. Long COVID was present in a large proportion of people affected by the SARS-CoV-2 infection. Presence of Long COVID symptoms displayed a dose–response relationship with the level of disease exposure, with a greater prevalence of symptoms associated with the severe form in the acute period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: This HEMATO-MADRID COVID-19 study assessed COVID-19 outcomes in 1818 hematologic cancer patients from February 2020 to October 2022 across different phases, including the Omicron period. Severe cases were more common in patients over 70 years with comorbidities or chronic lymphocytic leukemia. However, during the Omicron period, rates of severe illness reduced notably, especially among vaccinated individuals. Hospitalization, intensive care admissions, and overall mortality decreased in the Omicron phase compared to pre-Omicron, yet mortality rates in hospitalized patients remained high. Older age consistently correlated with higher mortality risk in both phases. Factors like prior stem cell transplantation, vaccination, and specific treatments were linked to improved survival rates among hematologic cancer patients facing COVID-19. A greater understanding of clinical trends in COVID-19 outcomes among patients with hematologic malignancies (HM) over the course of the pandemic, particularly the Omicron era, is needed. This ongoing, observational, and registry-based study with prospective data collection evaluated COVID-19 clinical severity and mortality in 1818 adult HM patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between 27 February 2020 and 1 October 2022, at 31 centers in the Madrid region of Spain. Of these, 1281 (70.5%) and 537 (29.5%) were reported in the pre-Omicron and Omicron periods, respectively. Overall, patients aged ≥70 years (odds ratio 2.16, 95% CI 1.64–2.87), with >1 comorbidity (2.44, 1.85–3.21), or with an underlying HM of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (1.64, 1.19–2.27), had greater odds of severe/critical COVID-19; odds were lower during the Omicron BA.1/BA.2 (0.28, 0.2–0.37) or BA.4/BA.5 (0.13, 0.08–0.19) periods and among patients vaccinated with one or two (0.51, 0.34–0.75) or three or four (0.22, 0.16–0.29) doses. The hospitalization rate (75.3% [963/1279], 35.7% [191/535]), rate of intensive care admission (30.0% [289/963], 14.7% [28/191]), and mortality rate overall (31.9% [409/1281], 9.9% [53/536]) and in hospitalized patients (41.3% [398/963], 22.0% [42/191]) decreased from the pre-Omicron to Omicron period. Age ≥70 years was the only factor associated with higher mortality risk in both the pre-Omicron (hazard ratio 2.57, 95% CI 2.03–3.25) and Omicron (3.19, 95% CI 1.59–6.42) periods. Receipt of prior stem cell transplantation, COVID-19 vaccination(s), and treatment with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or remdesivir were associated with greater survival rates. In conclusion, COVID-19 mortality in HM patients has decreased considerably in the Omicron period; however, mortality in hospitalized HM patients remains high. Specific studies should be undertaken to test new treatments and preventive interventions in HM patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of post‐traumatic stress symptoms, and to identify possible predictive factors in Norwegian intensive care unit survivors, 6 months after admission to the intensive care unit with COVID‐19. Background: The SARS CoV‐2 virus causing COVID‐19 has spread worldwide since it was declared a pandemic in March 2020. The most severely ill patients have been treated in the intensive care due to acute respiratory failure and also acute respiratory distress syndrome. It is well documented that these severe conditions can lead to complex and long‐lasting symptoms, such as psychological distress, and was, therefore, investigated for the specific COVID‐19 population. Design: Prospective observational study. Methods: Clinical data and patient reported outcome measures were collected by the Norwegian Intensive Care and Pandemic Registry and by the study group 6 months after admission to an intensive care unit. Results: Among 222 COVID‐19 patients admitted to Norwegian intensive care units between 10 March and 6 July 2020, 175 survived. The study sample consisted of 131 patients who responded to at least one patient reported outcome measure at 6 months following admission. The primary outcome was self‐reported post‐traumatic stress symptoms, using the Impact of Event Scale‐6 (n = 89). Of those, 22.5% reported post‐traumatic stress symptoms 6 months after admission. Female gender, younger age and having a high respiratory rate at admission were statistically significant predictive factors for reporting post‐traumatic stress symptoms. Conclusions: The result is in accordance with previously published research with comparable populations, suggesting that for many COVID‐19 survivors psychological distress is a part of the post‐acute sequelae. Results from the present study should be replicated in larger datasets. Relevance to Clinical Practice: This project provides important insight to post‐acute sequelae after COVID‐19 that patients may experience after critical illness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Evidence and clinical experience suggest that there are a range of signs of health issues that affect patients who have recovered from acute COVID-19 infection. This condition is commonly referred to as "persistent COVID-19," which is not connected with the severity of the disease. We have identified the prevalence and clinical-epidemiological characteristics of patients with COVID-19 and persistent symptoms treated in primary care centers. This is a descriptive observational study conducted between December 2020 and May 2022, the data were collected from digitized medical records and interviewing 1542 individuals with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. These patients were clinically followed for up to 1 year, based on the prevalence of symptoms. When stratifying by the risk of developing persistent COVID-19, 37.09% of the patients exhibited risk factors, with age (over 60 years) and cardiovascular risk factors predominating. The obtained prevalence of persistent COVID-19 at 90 days was 12.39%, with a slight predominance in females (55%) and a mean age of 45.8 years. The most affected systems were the cardiovascular, respiratory, and psychoneurological systems, with predominant symptoms of fatigue (41.88%), dyspnea (32.46%), and headache (14.66%), among others. The average duration of persistent symptoms was 178 days, equivalent to 6 months. In conclusion, over 10% of patients who recover from acute SARS-CoV-2 infection developed long-term consequences. Objective: To measure the prevalence and clinical-epidemiological characteristics of individuals diagnosed with COVID-19 and persistent symptoms treated in primary care centers in Área Sanitaria Sur de Córdoba (Spain) between December 2020 and May 2022. Methods: A retrospective observational study of the population of Área Sanitaria Sur de Córdoba was developed between December 2020 and May 2022. The scope of the study was 1542 individuals, and the prevalence of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and persistent symptoms was determined based on laboratory-confirmed cases, randomly selected from adults who had progressed beyond the acute phase of the disease. All data were managed by the Área Sanitaria Sur de Córdoba (Spain). Results: The risk factor of exhibiting one or more risk factors associated with developing persistent COVID-19 is 37.09%. The obtained prevalence of persistent COVID-19 at 90 days is 12.39%, it is higher in females (55%) than males and the mean age was 45.8 years. The most affected systems were the cardiovascular, respiratory, and psychoneurological systems, with predominant symptoms of fatigue (41.88%), dyspnea (32.46%), and headache (14.66%), among others. Conclusions: Results confirm that more than 10% of individuals recovering from acute SARS-CoV-2 infection showed long-term consequences and the observed persistent symptom duration was 178 days on average. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective was to evaluate the Modified Early Warning Score in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 plus chronic disease. Methods: Retrospective observational study, 430 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and chronic disease. Instrument, Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS). Data analysis, with Cox and logistic regression, to predict survival and risk. Results: Of 430 patients, 58.6% survived, and 41.4% did not. The risk was: low 53.5%, medium 23.7%, and high 22.8%. The MEWS score was similar between survivors 3.02, p 0.373 (95% CI: −0.225–0.597) and non-survivors 3.20 (95% CI: −0.224–0.597). There is a linear relationship between MEWS and mortality risk R 0.920, ANOVA 0.000, constant 4.713, and coefficient 4.406. The Cox Regression p 0.011, with a risk of deterioration of 0.325, with a positive coefficient, the higher the risk, the higher the mortality, while the invasive mechanical ventilation coefficient was negative −0.757. By providing oxygen and ventilation, mortality is lower. Conclusions: The predictive value of the modified early warning score in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and chronic disease is not predictive with the MEWS scale. Additional assessment is required to prevent complications, especially when patients are assessed as low-risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Increased advance care planning was endorsed at the start of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with the aim of optimizing end-of-life care. This retrospective observational cohort study explores the impact of advanced care planning on place of death. 21,962 records from patients who died during the first year of the pandemic and who had an Electronic Palliative Care Coordination System record were included. 11,913 (54%) had a documented place of death. Of these 5,339 died at home and 2,378 died in hospital. 9,971 (45%) had both a documented place of death and a preferred place of death. Of these, 7,668 (77%) died in their preferred location. Documented elements of advance care planning, such as resuscitation status and ceiling of treatment decisions, were associated with an increased likelihood of dying in the preferred location, as were the number of times the record was viewed. During the COVID-19 pandemic, advanced care planning and the use of digital care coordination systems presented an opportunity for patients and healthcare staff to personalize care and influence end-of-life experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: COVID-19 has changed all the routine works of human beings around the globe. The food habits of the elderly are changing due to various reasons. The purpose of this study was to find out the factors influencing food habit changes due to the pandemic. Methods: A non-experimental research design, a survey, was executed at Sachibunia, Nijkhamr, Krishnonagar, and Raingamari villages under Batiaghata Upazila in the Khulna District of Bangladesh. Following a simple random sampling technique, data were collected through a field survey using an interview schedule. To show the relations between/among the variables, the chi-square/Fisher exact test was performed. For measuring the degree of relations of those variables, Binary Logistic Regression was used to find out the factors of food habit changes with a 95% confidence interval. For the model, p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The study reveals that 39% of the elderly changed their food habits during COVID-19. Except for the sex and employment status of the elderly, all the sociodemographic factors of this study were associated with food habit changes. Among these sociodemographic factors, age (OR = 2.51, 95% CI, 1.22-5.18), religion (OR = 2.07, 95% CI, 1.13-3.78), spouses' occupation (OR = 3.73, 95% CI, 1.90-7.32), and family head (OR = 3.74, 95% CI, 1.43-9.75) of the elderly influenced their food habits changes. Conclusion: The socio-demographic and economic situations were responsible for the elderly's food habits changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study aimed to analyze the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the rates of periodontal procedures, and provide a comparison with general dental care and primary medical care procedures carried out in the Brazilian Public Health System. The study had an ecological, retrospective design with data from 5,564 Brazilian municipalities (99.9%). A multilevel mixed-effects linear regression was used to analyze the longitudinal associations between the COVID-19 pandemic and the rate of procedures. There was a significant reduction in the number of periodontal procedures (Coef. −428.6 [95%CI −774.3/-82.9]) during the COVID-19 pandemic, although this reduction was no greater than that of medical and general dental procedures. Medical procedures witnessed the sharpest drop in procedures (Coef. −2831.5 [95%CI −3964.1/-1699.0]). A lower rate of general dental procedures was also identified during the pandemic (Coef. −2,110.6 [95%CI −3,400.8/-820.4]). The COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative effect on the rate of periodontal procedures carried out in the Brazilian Public Health System. The highest recutions were observed in general dental and medical procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In sub-Saharan Africa, there is limited evidence on the COVID-19 health-related effect from front-line health provision settings. Therefore, this study aimed to analyse the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on routine maternal and neonatal health services in three referral hospitals. Materials and methods: We conducted an observational study using aggregate monthly maternal and neonatal health services routine data for two years (March 2019–February 2021) in three referral hospitals including two maternities: Hôpital National Ignace Deen (HNID) in Conakry and Hôpital Regional de Mamou (HRM) in Mamou and one neonatology ward: Institut de Nutrition et de Santé de l'Enfant (INSE) in Conakry. We compared indicators of health service utilisation, provision and health outcomes before and during the COVID-19 pandemic periods. An interrupted time-series analysis (ITSA) was performed to assess the relationship between changes in maternal and neonatal health indicators and COVID-19 through cross-correlation. Results: During COVID-19, the mean monthly number (MMN) of deliveries decreased significantly in HNID (p = 0.039) and slightly increased in HRM. In the two maternities, the change in the MMN of deliveries were significantly associated with COVID-19. The ITSA confirmed the association between the increase in the MMN of deliveries and COVID-19 in HRM (bootstrapped F-value = 1.46, 95%CI [0.036–8.047], p < 0.01). We observed an increasing trend in obstetric complications in HNID, while the trend declined in HRM. The MMN of maternal deaths increased significantly (p = 0.011) in HNID, while it slightly increased in HRM. In INSE, the MMN of neonatal admissions significantly declined (p < 0.001) and this decline was associated with COVID-19. The MMN of neonatal deaths significantly decreased (p = 0.009) in INSE and this decrease was related to COVID-19. Conclusion: The pandemic negatively affected the maternal and neonatal care provision, health service utilisation and health outcomes in two referral hospitals located in Conakry, the COVID-19 most-affected region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Twice weekly lateral flow tests (LFTs) for secondary school children was UK Government policy from 8 March 2021. We evaluate use of LFTs (both supervised at test centres, and home test kits) in school-aged children in Cheshire and Merseyside. Methods We report (i) number of LFT positives (ii) proportion of LFT positive with confirmatory reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test within 2 days, and (iii) agreement between LFT-positive and confirmatory PCR, and dependence of (i–iii) on COVID-19 prevalence. Findings 1 248 468 LFTs were taken by 211 255 12–18 years old, and 163 914 by 52 116 5–11 years old between 6 November 2020 and 31 July 2021. Five thousand three hundred and fourteen (2.5%) 12–18 years old and 1996 (3.8%) 5–11 years old returned LFT positives, with 3829 (72.1%) and 1535 (76.9%) confirmatory PCRs, and 3357 (87.7%) and 1383 (90.1%) confirmatory PCR-positives, respectively. Monthly proportions of LFT positive with PCR negative varied between 4.7% and 35.3% in 12–18 years old (corresponding proportion of all tests positive: 9.7% and 0.3%). Deprivation and non-White ethnicity were associated with reduced uptake of confirmatory PCR. Interpretation Substantial inequalities in confirmatory testing need more attention to avoid further disadvantage through education loss. When prevalence is low additional measures, including confirmatory testing, are needed. Local Directors of Public Health taking more control over schools testing may be needed. Funding DHSC, MRC, NIHR, EPSRC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This multicenter observational study was done to evaluate risk factors related to the development of BSI in patients admitted to ICU for COVID-19. Methods: All patients with COVID-19 admitted in two COVID-19 dedicated ICUs in two different hospital between 02–2020 and 02–2021 were recruited. Result: 537 patients were included of whom 265 (49.3%) experienced at least one BSI. Patients who developed bacteremia had a higher SOFA score [10 (8–12) vs 9 (7–10), p < 0.001], had been intubated more frequently [95.8% vs 75%, p < 0.001] and for a median longer time [16 days (9–25) vs 8 days (5–14), p < 0.001]. Patients with BSI had a median longer ICU stay [18 days (12–31.5) vs 9 days (5–15), p < 0.001] and higher mortality [54% vs 42.3%, p < 0.001] than those who did not develop it. Development of BSI resulted in a higher SOFA score [aHR 1.08 (95% CI 1.03–1.12)] and a higher Charlson score [csAHR 1.15 (95% CI 1.05–1.25)]. Conclusion: A high SOFA score and a high Charlson score resulted associated with BSI's development. Conversely, immunosuppressive therapy like steroids and tocilizumab, has no role in increasing the risk of bacteremia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale, Aims and Objectives: Critics have charged that evidence‐based medicine (EBM) overemphasises algorithmic rules over unstructured clinical experience and intuition, but the role of structured decision support systems in improving health outcomes remains uncertain. We aim to assess if delivery of anticoagulant prophylaxis in hospitalised patients with COVID‐19 according to an algorithm based on evidence‐based clinical practice guideline (CPG) improved clinical outcomes compared with administration of anticoagulant treatment given at individual practitioners' discretion. Methods: An observational design consisting of the analysis of all acutely ill, consecutive patients (n = 1783) with confirmed COVID‐19 diagnosis admitted between 10 March 2020 to 11 January 2022 to an US academic center. American Society of Haematology CPG for anticoagulant prophylaxis in hospitalised patients with COVID‐19 was converted into a clinical pathway and translated into fast‐and‐frugal decision (FFT) tree ('algorithm'). We compared delivery of anticoagulant prophylaxis in hospitalised patients with COVID‐19 according to the FFT algorithm with administration of anticoagulant treatment given at individual practitioners' discretion. Results: In an adjusted analysis, using combination of Lasso (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator) and propensity score based weighting [augmented inverse‐probability weighting] statistical techniques controlling for cluster data, the algorithm did not reduce death, venous thromboembolism, or major bleeding, but helped avoid longer hospital stay [number of patients needed to be treated (NNT) = 40 (95% CI: 23–143), indicating that for every 40 patients (23–143) managed on FFT algorithm, one avoided staying in hospital longer than 10 days] and averted admission to intensive‐care unit (ICU) [NNT = 19 (95% CI: 13–40)]. All model's selected covariates were well balanced. The results remained robust to sensitivity analyses used to test the stability of the findings. Conclusions: When delivered using a structured FFT algorithm, CPG shortened the hospital stay and help avoided admission to ICU, but it did not affect other relevant outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID‐19 pandemic has necessitated alterations in provision of health care and how patients access it. Telehealth has replaced traditional face‐to‐face outpatient clinics in an unprecedented manner. This study aimed to assess overall patient and clinician satisfaction with telehealth consultations, to establish acceptability of telehealth during pandemic and non‐pandemic times, and document feedback. Materials and Methods: A prospective observational study involving women presenting to a general gynaecology outpatient department was performed. Women who attended for consultation between 13 July and 4 September 2020 were invited to participate in a questionnaire following their telehealth appointment. Clinicians consulting in the outpatient department were invited to complete a questionnaire at the end of the eight‐week study period. Satisfaction, utility and acceptability data were obtained using visual analogue scales (VAS). Results: Twenty‐six out of 56 (46.4%) clinicians and 124/870 (14.3%) patients completed the questionnaire. Patients who responded were older and more likely to have been born in Australia than women who did not (P = 0.0355 and P = 0.005, respectively). Overall patient satisfaction with telehealth was high (median VAS (interquartile range), 8.6 (5.6–9.8)). More women found telehealth to be acceptable during a pandemic than afterward (8.9 vs 6.6, P < 0.0001). Clinicians were less satisfied with telehealth than patients (7.1 vs 8.6, P = 0.02); however, most would be happy to continue using telehealth in non‐pandemic times (7.0 (6.2–9.8)). Conclusion: Telehealth consultations allow provision of gynaecological care at a time when reducing risk of infection to patients and staff is paramount. Telehealth gynaecology consultations are efficient and convenient without significant detriment to patient or clinician satisfaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused disproportionate suffering among vulnerable and socioeconomically disadvantaged portions of the population. Low-income and minority populations are likely to experience disparate disease and mental health burdens. Currently, there is little evidence regarding how the experience of the early months of the US COVID-19 outbreak differed by income level, and how that related to mental health symptoms. The present study used data from a national sample of US adults (n = 5023) who completed measures related to the COVID experience, the COVID-19 Fear Scale, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), and the Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8). Multivariable regression was performed to determine whether income level (low: <$45,000 vs high: ≥$75,000) was significantly associated with COVID experience measures, PHQ-8, GAD-7, and COVID fear scores. Among the low-income group, COVID-19 had a significantly greater negative impact on: family income/employment, access to food, access to mental health treatment, and stress and discord in the family. Participants in the low-income group also had greater odds of a PHQ-8 score ≥10 (odds ratio [OR] = 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08, 1.77) and a GAD-7 score ≥10 (OR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.27, 2.14) compared to those in the high-income group. Study findings suggest substantial differences in how COVID-19 impacted daily life and mental health between adults living in low-income households compared to high-earning households during the early months of the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the performance of an Electronic Health Record (EHR) integrated risk score for COVID-19 positive outpatients to predict 30-day risk of hospitalization. Patients and Methods: A retrospective observational study of 67 470 patients with COVID-19 confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test between March 12, 2020 and February 8, 2021. Risk scores were calculated based on data in the chart at the time of the incident infection. Results: The Mayo Clinic COVID-19 risk score consisted of 13 components included age, sex, chronic lung disease, congenital heart disease, congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, end stage liver disease, end stage renal disease, hypertension, immune compromised, nursing home resident, and pregnant. Univariate analysis showed all components, except pregnancy, have significant (P <.001) association with admission. The Mayo Clinic COVID-19 risk score showed a Receiver Operating Characteristic Area Under Curve (AUC) of 0.837 for the prediction of admission for this large cohort of COVID-19 positive patients. Conclusion: The Mayo Clinic COVID-19 risk score is a simple score that is easily integrated into the EHR with excellent predictive performance for severe COVID-19. It can be leveraged to stratify risk for severe COVID-19 at initial contact, when considering therapeutics or in the allocation of vaccine supply. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]