Search

The aim of this study was to analyze whether the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine reduces mortality in patients with moderate or severe COVID-19 disease requiring oxygen therapy. A retrospective cohort study, with data from 148 hospitals in both Spain (111 hospitals) and Argentina (37 hospitals), was conducted. We evaluated hospitalized patients for COVID-19 older than 18 years with oxygen requirements. Vaccine protection against death was assessed through a multivariable logistic regression and propensity score matching. We also performed a subgroup analysis according to vaccine type. The adjusted model was used to determine the population attributable risk. Between January 2020 and May 2022, we evaluated 21,479 COVID-19 hospitalized patients with oxygen requirements. Of these, 338 (1.5%) patients received a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine and 379 (1.8%) were fully vaccinated. In vaccinated patients, mortality was 20.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 17.9-24), compared to 19.5% (95% CI: 19-20) in unvaccinated patients, resulting in a crude odds ratio (OR) of 1.07 (95% CI: 0.89-1.29; p = 0.41). However, after considering the multiple comorbidities in the vaccinated group, the adjusted OR was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.56-0.95; p = 0.02) with a population attributable risk reduction of 4.3% (95% CI: 1-5). The higher risk reduction for mortality was with messenger RNA (mRNA) BNT162b2 (Pfizer) (OR 0.37; 95% CI: 0.23-0.59; p < 0.01), ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca) (OR 0.42; 95% CI: 0.20-0.86; p = 0.02), and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) (OR 0.68; 95% CI: 0.41-1.12; p = 0.13), and lower with Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik) (OR 0.93; 95% CI: 0.6-1.45; p = 0.76). COVID-19 vaccines significantly reduce the probability of death in patients suffering from a moderate or severe disease (oxygen therapy)., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Medical Virology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: We describe demographic features, treatments and clinical outcomes in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) COVID-19 cohort, one of the world's largest international, standardized data sets concerning hospitalized patients., Methods: The data set analysed includes COVID-19 patients hospitalized between January 2020 and January 2022 in 52 countries. We investigated how symptoms on admission, co-morbidities, risk factors and treatments varied by age, sex and other characteristics. We used Cox regression models to investigate associations between demographics, symptoms, co-morbidities and other factors with risk of death, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV)., Results: Data were available for 689 572 patients with laboratory-confirmed (91.1%) or clinically diagnosed (8.9%) SARS-CoV-2 infection from 52 countries. Age [adjusted hazard ratio per 10 years 1.49 (95% CI 1.48, 1.49)] and male sex [1.23 (1.21, 1.24)] were associated with a higher risk of death. Rates of admission to an ICU and use of IMV increased with age up to age 60 years then dropped. Symptoms, co-morbidities and treatments varied by age and had varied associations with clinical outcomes. The case-fatality ratio varied by country partly due to differences in the clinical characteristics of recruited patients and was on average 21.5%., Conclusions: Age was the strongest determinant of risk of death, with a ∼30-fold difference between the oldest and youngest groups; each of the co-morbidities included was associated with up to an almost 2-fold increase in risk. Smoking and obesity were also associated with a higher risk of death. The size of our international database and the standardized data collection method make this study a comprehensive international description of COVID-19 clinical features. Our findings may inform strategies that involve prioritization of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who have a higher risk of death., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the care of patients with other diseases. Difficulty in access to healthcare during these months has been especially relevant for persons with HIV infection (PWH). This study therefore sought to ascertain the clinical outcomes and effectiveness of the measures implemented among PWH in a region with one of the highest incidence rates in Europe., Methods: Retrospective, observational, pre-post intervention study to compare the outcomes of PWH attended at a high-complexity healthcare hospital from March to October 2020 and during the same months across the period 2016-2019. The intervention consisted of home drug deliveries and preferential use of non face-to-face consultations. The effectiveness of the measures implemented was determined by reference to the number of emergency visits, hospitalisations, mortality rate, and percentage of PWH with viral load >50copies, before and after the two pandemic waves., Results: A total of 2760 PWH were attended from January 2016 to October 2020. During the pandemic, there was a monthly mean of 106.87 telephone consultations and 2075 home deliveries of medical drugs dispensed to ambulatory patients. No statistically significant differences were found between the rate of admission of patients with COVID-HIV co-infection and that of the remaining patients (1172.76 admissions/100,000 population vs. 1424.29, p=0.401) or in mortality (11.54% vs. 12.96%, p=0.939). The percentage of PWH with viral load >50copies was similar before and after the pandemic (1.20% pre-pandemic vs. 0.51% in 2020, p=0.078)., Conclusion: Our results show that the strategies implemented during the first 8 months of the pandemic prevented any deterioration in the control and follow-up parameters routinely used on PWH. Furthermore, they contribute to the debate about how telemedicine and telepharmacy can fit into future healthcare models., (Copyright © 2021 Sociedad Española de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, several methodologies were designed for obtaining electronic health record (EHR)-derived datasets for research. These processes are often based on black boxes, on which clinical researchers are unaware of how the data were recorded, extracted, and transformed. In order to solve this, it is essential that extract, transform, and load (ETL) processes are based on transparent, homogeneous, and formal methodologies, making them understandable, reproducible, and auditable., Objectives: This study aims to design and implement a methodology, according with FAIR Principles, for building ETL processes (focused on data extraction, selection, and transformation) for EHR reuse in a transparent and flexible manner, applicable to any clinical condition and health care organization., Methods: The proposed methodology comprises four stages: (1) analysis of secondary use models and identification of data operations, based on internationally used clinical repositories, case report forms, and aggregated datasets; (2) modeling and formalization of data operations, through the paradigm of the Detailed Clinical Models; (3) agnostic development of data operations, selecting SQL and R as programming languages; and (4) automation of the ETL instantiation, building a formal configuration file with XML., Results: First, four international projects were analyzed to identify 17 operations, necessary to obtain datasets according to the specifications of these projects from the EHR. With this, each of the data operations was formalized, using the ISO 13606 reference model, specifying the valid data types as arguments, inputs and outputs, and their cardinality. Then, an agnostic catalog of data was developed through data-oriented programming languages previously selected. Finally, an automated ETL instantiation process was built from an ETL configuration file formally defined., Conclusions: This study has provided a transparent and flexible solution to the difficulty of making the processes for obtaining EHR-derived data for secondary use understandable, auditable, and reproducible. Moreover, the abstraction carried out in this study means that any previous EHR reuse methodology can incorporate these results into them., Competing Interests: None declared., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Objective: To assess changes in international mortality rates and laboratory recovery rates during hospitalisation for patients hospitalised with SARS-CoV-2 between the first wave (1 March to 30 June 2020) and the second wave (1 July 2020 to 31 January 2021) of the COVID-19 pandemic., Design, Setting and Participants: This is a retrospective cohort study of 83 178 hospitalised patients admitted between 7 days before or 14 days after PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within the Consortium for Clinical Characterization of COVID-19 by Electronic Health Record, an international multihealthcare system collaborative of 288 hospitals in the USA and Europe. The laboratory recovery rates and mortality rates over time were compared between the two waves of the pandemic., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality rate within 28 days after hospitalisation stratified by predicted low, medium and high mortality risk at baseline. The secondary outcome was the average rate of change in laboratory values during the first week of hospitalisation., Results: Baseline Charlson Comorbidity Index and laboratory values at admission were not significantly different between the first and second waves. The improvement in laboratory values over time was faster in the second wave compared with the first. The average C reactive protein rate of change was -4.72 mg/dL vs -4.14 mg/dL per day (p=0.05). The mortality rates within each risk category significantly decreased over time, with the most substantial decrease in the high-risk group (42.3% in March-April 2020 vs 30.8% in November 2020 to January 2021, p<0.001) and a moderate decrease in the intermediate-risk group (21.5% in March-April 2020 vs 14.3% in November 2020 to January 2021, p<0.001)., Conclusions: Admission profiles of patients hospitalised with SARS-CoV-2 infection did not differ greatly between the first and second waves of the pandemic, but there were notable differences in laboratory improvement rates during hospitalisation. Mortality risks among patients with similar risk profiles decreased over the course of the pandemic. The improvement in laboratory values and mortality risk was consistent across multiple countries., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

New SARS-CoV-2 variants, breakthrough infections, waning immunity, and sub-optimal vaccination rates account for surges of hospitalizations and deaths. There is an urgent need for clinically valuable and generalizable triage tools assisting the allocation of hospital resources, particularly in resource-limited countries. We developed and validate CODOP, a machine learning-based tool for predicting the clinical outcome of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. CODOP was trained, tested and validated with six cohorts encompassing 29223 COVID-19 patients from more than 150 hospitals in Spain, the USA and Latin America during 2020-22. CODOP uses 12 clinical parameters commonly measured at hospital admission for reaching high discriminative ability up to 9 days before clinical resolution (AUROC: 0·90-0·96), it is well calibrated, and it enables an effective dynamic risk stratification during hospitalization. Furthermore, CODOP maintains its predictive ability independently of the virus variant and the vaccination status. To reckon with the fluctuating pressure levels in hospitals during the pandemic, we offer two online CODOP calculators, suited for undertriage or overtriage scenarios, validated with a cohort of patients from 42 hospitals in three Latin American countries (78-100% sensitivity and 89-97% specificity). The performance of CODOP in heterogeneous and geographically disperse patient cohorts and the easiness of use strongly suggest its clinical utility, particularly in resource-limited countries., Competing Interests: RK, DP, RG, JC, JA, JN, CL, JR, NG, MP, AL, MM, FR, MO, PY, JR, ET, RG, MC, PV, FP, RC, IH, BB, JP, NF, BL, DG No competing interests declared, (© 2022, Klén et al.)

The COVID-19 pandemic has represented a major cause of morbidity/mortality worldwide, overstressing health systems. Multiple myeloma (MM) patients show an increased risk for infections and they are expected to be particularly vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here we have obtained a comprehensive picture of the impact of COVID-19 in MM patients on a local and a global scale using a federated data research network (TriNetX) that provided access to Electronic Medical Records (EMR) from Health Care Organizations (HCO) all over the world. Through propensity score matched analyses we found that the number of new diagnoses of MM was reduced in 2020 compared to 2019 (RR 0.86, 95%CI 0.76-0.96) and the survival of newly diagnosed MM cases decreased similarly (HR 0.61, 0.38-0.81). MM patients showed higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (RR 2.09, 1.58-2.76) and a higher excess mortality in 2020 (difference in excess mortality 9%, 4.4-13.2) than non-MM patients. By interrogating large EMR datasets from HCO in Europe and globally, we confirmed that MM patients have been more severely impacted by COVID-19 pandemic than non-MM patients. This study highlights the necessity of extending preventive measures worlwide to protect vulnerable patients from SARS-CoV-2 infection by promoting social distancing and an intensive vaccination strategies., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Many countries have experienced 2 predominant waves of COVID-19-related hospitalizations. Comparing the clinical trajectories of patients hospitalized in separate waves of the pandemic enables further understanding of the evolving epidemiology, pathophysiology, and health care dynamics of the COVID-19 pandemic., Objective: In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed electronic health record (EHR) data from patients with SARS-CoV-2 infections hospitalized in participating health care systems representing 315 hospitals across 6 countries. We compared hospitalization rates, severe COVID-19 risk, and mean laboratory values between patients hospitalized during the first and second waves of the pandemic., Methods: Using a federated approach, each participating health care system extracted patient-level clinical data on their first and second wave cohorts and submitted aggregated data to the central site. Data quality control steps were adopted at the central site to correct for implausible values and harmonize units. Statistical analyses were performed by computing individual health care system effect sizes and synthesizing these using random effect meta-analyses to account for heterogeneity. We focused the laboratory analysis on C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, fibrinogen, procalcitonin, D-dimer, and creatinine based on their reported associations with severe COVID-19., Results: Data were available for 79,613 patients, of which 32,467 were hospitalized in the first wave and 47,146 in the second wave. The prevalence of male patients and patients aged 50 to 69 years decreased significantly between the first and second waves. Patients hospitalized in the second wave had a 9.9% reduction in the risk of severe COVID-19 compared to patients hospitalized in the first wave (95% CI 8.5%-11.3%). Demographic subgroup analyses indicated that patients aged 26 to 49 years and 50 to 69 years; male and female patients; and black patients had significantly lower risk for severe disease in the second wave than in the first wave. At admission, the mean values of CRP were significantly lower in the second wave than in the first wave. On the seventh hospital day, the mean values of CRP, ferritin, fibrinogen, and procalcitonin were significantly lower in the second wave than in the first wave. In general, countries exhibited variable changes in laboratory testing rates from the first to the second wave. At admission, there was a significantly higher testing rate for D-dimer in France, Germany, and Spain., Conclusions: Patients hospitalized in the second wave were at significantly lower risk for severe COVID-19. This corresponded to mean laboratory values in the second wave that were more likely to be in typical physiological ranges on the seventh hospital day compared to the first wave. Our federated approach demonstrated the feasibility and power of harmonizing heterogeneous EHR data from multiple international health care systems to rapidly conduct large-scale studies to characterize how COVID-19 clinical trajectories evolve., (©Griffin M Weber, Harrison G Zhang, Sehi L'Yi, Clara-Lea Bonzel, Chuan Hong, Paul Avillach, Alba Gutiérrez-Sacristán, Nathan P Palmer, Amelia Li Min Tan, Xuan Wang, William Yuan, Nils Gehlenborg, Anna Alloni, Danilo F Amendola, Antonio Bellasi, Riccardo Bellazzi, Michele Beraghi, Mauro Bucalo, Luca Chiovato, Kelly Cho, Arianna Dagliati, Hossein Estiri, Robert W Follett, Noelia García Barrio, David A Hanauer, Darren W Henderson, Yuk-Lam Ho, John H Holmes, Meghan R Hutch, Ramakanth Kavuluru, Katie Kirchoff, Jeffrey G Klann, Ashok K Krishnamurthy, Trang T Le, Molei Liu, Ne Hooi Will Loh, Sara Lozano-Zahonero, Yuan Luo, Sarah Maidlow, Adeline Makoudjou, Alberto Malovini, Marcelo Roberto Martins, Bertrand Moal, Michele Morris, Danielle L Mowery, Shawn N Murphy, Antoine Neuraz, Kee Yuan Ngiam, Marina P Okoshi, Gilbert S Omenn, Lav P Patel, Miguel Pedrera Jiménez, Robson A Prudente, Malarkodi Jebathilagam Samayamuthu, Fernando J Sanz Vidorreta, Emily R Schriver, Petra Schubert, Pablo Serrano Balazote, Byorn WL Tan, Suzana E Tanni, Valentina Tibollo, Shyam Visweswaran, Kavishwar B Wagholikar, Zongqi Xia, Daniela Zöller, The Consortium For Clinical Characterization Of COVID-19 By EHR (4CE), Isaac S Kohane, Tianxi Cai, Andrew M South, Gabriel A Brat. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 11.10.2021.)

Coincident with the tsunami of COVID-19-related publications, there has been a surge of studies using real-world data, including those obtained from the electronic health record (EHR). Unfortunately, several of these high-profile publications were retracted because of concerns regarding the soundness and quality of the studies and the EHR data they purported to analyze. These retractions highlight that although a small community of EHR informatics experts can readily identify strengths and flaws in EHR-derived studies, many medical editorial teams and otherwise sophisticated medical readers lack the framework to fully critically appraise these studies. In addition, conventional statistical analyses cannot overcome the need for an understanding of the opportunities and limitations of EHR-derived studies. We distill here from the broader informatics literature six key considerations that are crucial for appraising studies utilizing EHR data: data completeness, data collection and handling (eg, transformation), data type (ie, codified, textual), robustness of methods against EHR variability (within and across institutions, countries, and time), transparency of data and analytic code, and the multidisciplinary approach. These considerations will inform researchers, clinicians, and other stakeholders as to the recommended best practices in reviewing manuscripts, grants, and other outputs from EHR-data derived studies, and thereby promote and foster rigor, quality, and reliability of this rapidly growing field., (©Isaac S Kohane, Bruce J Aronow, Paul Avillach, Brett K Beaulieu-Jones, Riccardo Bellazzi, Robert L Bradford, Gabriel A Brat, Mario Cannataro, James J Cimino, Noelia García-Barrio, Nils Gehlenborg, Marzyeh Ghassemi, Alba Gutiérrez-Sacristán, David A Hanauer, John H Holmes, Chuan Hong, Jeffrey G Klann, Ne Hooi Will Loh, Yuan Luo, Kenneth D Mandl, Mohamad Daniar, Jason H Moore, Shawn N Murphy, Antoine Neuraz, Kee Yuan Ngiam, Gilbert S Omenn, Nathan Palmer, Lav P Patel, Miguel Pedrera-Jiménez, Piotr Sliz, Andrew M South, Amelia Li Min Tan, Deanne M Taylor, Bradley W Taylor, Carlo Torti, Andrew K Vallejos, Kavishwar B Wagholikar, The Consortium For Clinical Characterization Of COVID-19 By EHR (4CE), Griffin M Weber, Tianxi Cai. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 02.03.2021.)

Background: COVID-19 ranks as the single largest health incident worldwide in decades. In such a scenario, electronic health records (EHRs) should provide a timely response to healthcare needs and to data uses that go beyond direct medical care and are known as secondary uses, which include biomedical research. However, it is usual for each data analysis initiative to define its own information model in line with its requirements. These specifications share clinical concepts, but differ in format and recording criteria, something that creates data entry redundancy in multiple electronic data capture systems (EDCs) with the consequent investment of effort and time by the organization., Objective: This study sought to design and implement a flexible methodology based on detailed clinical models (DCM), which would enable EHRs generated in a tertiary hospital to be effectively reused without loss of meaning and within a short time., Material and Methods: The proposed methodology comprises four stages: (1) specification of an initial set of relevant variables for COVID-19; (2) modeling and formalization of clinical concepts using ISO 13606 standard and SNOMED CT and LOINC terminologies; (3) definition of transformation rules to generate secondary use models from standardized EHRs and development of them using R language; and (4) implementation and validation of the methodology through the generation of the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC-WHO) COVID-19 case report form. This process has been implemented into a 1300-bed tertiary Hospital for a cohort of 4489 patients hospitalized from 25 February 2020 to 10 September 2020., Results: An initial and expandable set of relevant concepts for COVID-19 was identified, modeled and formalized using ISO-13606 standard and SNOMED CT and LOINC terminologies. Similarly, an algorithm was designed and implemented with R and then applied to process EHRs in accordance with standardized concepts, transforming them into secondary use models. Lastly, these resources were applied to obtain a data extract conforming to the ISARIC-WHO COVID-19 case report form, without requiring manual data collection. The methodology allowed obtaining the observation domain of this model with a coverage of over 85% of patients in the majority of concepts., Conclusion: This study has furnished a solution to the difficulty of rapidly and efficiently obtaining EHR-derived data for secondary use in COVID-19, capable of adapting to changes in data specifications and applicable to other organizations and other health conditions. The conclusion to be drawn from this initial validation is that this DCM-based methodology allows the effective reuse of EHRs generated in a tertiary Hospital during COVID-19 pandemic, with no additional effort or time for the organization and with a greater data scope than that yielded by conventional manual data collection process in ad-hoc EDCs., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)