Cause-specific death in hospitalized individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2: more than just acute respiratory failure or thromboembolic events

Impact of age on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare workers : Influence of nonoccupational risk factors

BACKGROUND

The incidence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV‑2) infection was highest among older adults early in the COVID-19 pandemic; however, this pattern was later reversed with young adults showing the highest incidence. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors in healthcare workers (HCWs) associated with this evolution.

METHODS

We conducted a survey nested within a prospective cohort study of 680 HCWs from a tertiary referral public hospital who received 2 doses of SARS-CoV‑2 vaccine in January and February 2021 (VACCICO-VAO cohort). In October 2022 all participants were invited to participate in a survey. Risk factors were tested for association with COVID-19 ever, the number of COVID-19 episodes, and the time to the first episode.

RESULTS

Among 350 respondents (51% response rate, 90% female, mean age 48.1 years), 323 COVID-19 episodes were diagnosed during the study period. Multivariable analysis revealed that age < 35 years vs. > 50 years (odds ratio, OR 2.12, 95% confidence interval, CI 1.27-3.51; P = 0.004) and not maintaining social distance at social events (OR: 1.82, 95% CI: 1.16-3.19; P = 0.011) were associated with a higher risk of COVID-19. Age < 35 years (hazard ratio, HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.14-2.54; P = 0.010), and not maintaining social distance (HR 1.34, 95% CI 1.05-1.72; P = 0.020) were also associated with the time to the first episode.

CONCLUSIONS

The youngest HCWs had the highest incidence rate of COVID-19, which was not explained by occupational risk factors or health conditions. The increase in nonoccupational exposure since the end of the lockdowns in summer 2020 could by a key factor.

Unpacking the Complexity of COVID-19 Fatalities: Adverse Events as Contributing Factors-A Single-Center, Retrospective Analysis of the First Two Years of the Pandemic

In a retrospective analysis of 477 fatal COVID-19 cases hospitalised at a single medical centre during the period from 6 March 2020 to 30 June 2022, several factors defining those patients at admission were assessed, as well as the course of the hospitalisation and factors contributing to death. There was a predominance of men (59.3% (283)) burdened by comorbidities, with increased inflammation at admission. Patients aged ≥ 81 years were significantly more likely to be admitted to and die in infectious diseases units (IDU) due to respiratory failure, their hospital stays were shorter, and they were most likely not to receive specialist treatment. The most common COVID-19 complications included acute kidney injury in 31.2% (149) patients and thromboembolic complications in 23.5% (112). The course of hospitalisation was complicated by healthcare-associated infections (HAI) in 33.3% (159) of cases, more often in those treated with baricitinib (p < 0.001). The initial use of an antibiotic, although common (94.8% (452)), was unwarranted in almost half of the cases (47.6% (215)). Complications of hospitalisation (46.1% (220)) and adverse events involving staff (49.7% (237)) were found in almost half of the patients. In 88.7% (423) of the cases, death was due to respiratory failure in the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Adverse events during hospitalisation should be considered as an additional factor that, in addition to the infection itself, may have influenced the death of patients.

Risk Factors for Mortality of Hospitalized Adult Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Two-Year Cohort Study in a Private Tertiary Care Center in Mexico

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the high prevalence of comorbidities and the disparities between the public and private health subsystems in Mexico substantially contributed to the severe impact of the disease. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the risk factors at admission for in-hospital mortality of patients with COVID-19. A 2-year retrospective cohort study of hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia was conducted at a private tertiary care center. The study population consisted of 1258 patients with a median age of 56 ± 16.5 years, of whom 1093 recovered (86.8%) and 165 died (13.1%). In the univariate analysis, older age (p < 0.001), comorbidities such as hypertension (p < 0.001) and diabetes (p < 0.001), signs and symptoms of respiratory distress, and markers of acute inflammatory response were significantly more frequent in non-survivors. The multivariate analysis showed that older age (p < 0.001), the presence of cyanosis (p = 0.005), and previous myocardial infarction (p = 0.032) were independent predictors of mortality. In the studied cohort, the risk factors present at admission associated with increased mortality were older age, cyanosis, and a previous myocardial infarction, which can be used as valuable predictors for patients' outcomes. To our knowledge, this is the first study analyzing predictors of mortality in COVID-19 patients attended in a private tertiary hospital in Mexico.

COVID-19-related excess mortality - an overview of the current evidence

Analysis of excess deaths, defined as the difference in the total number of deaths in an emergency compared to the number of deaths expected under normal conditions, allows a more reliable assessment of the impact on health systems caused by the global threat of SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2). So far, data for the two years of the pandemic (2020-2021) indicates the occurrence of 14.9 million excess deaths according to WHO (World Health Organization) estimates. The purpose of the analysis conducted was to define the concept and identify the causes of excess mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic. Inconsistent and unreliable death registration systems; overburdened health systems in low- and middle-income countries; reduced access to medical services for patients with health problems other than COVID-19; the introduction of social distancing and lockdown rules, which translated into increased deaths from psychiatric illnesses and addictions; political considerations and media messages that interfered with vaccination acceptance and adherence; and the additional impact of other natural disasters (hurricanes, floods, drought) were identified as the most important reasons for excess deaths occurrence. The correct identification of country-specific factors and the correct response and countermeasures taken appear crucial in terms of limiting the negative impact of the current pandemic, but also of future threats of a similar nature, in order to reduce excess deaths.

The Foegen effect: A mechanism by which facemasks contribute to the COVID-19 case fatality rate

Extensive evidence in the literature supports the mandatory use of facemasks to reduce the infection rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, which causes the coronavirus disease (COVID-19). However, the effect of mask use on the disease course remains controversial. This study aimed to determine whether mandatory mask use influenced the case fatality rate in Kansas, USA between August 1st and October 15th 2020.This study applied secondary data on case updates, mask mandates, and demographic status related to Kansas State, USA. A parallelization analysis based on county-level data was conducted on these data. Results were controlled by performing multiple sensitivity analyses and a negative control.A parallelization analysis based on county-level data showed that in Kansas, counties with mask mandate had significantly higher case fatality rates than counties without mask mandate, with a risk ratio of 1.85 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.51-2.10) for COVID-19-related deaths. Even after adjusting for the number of "protected persons," that is, the number of persons who were not infected in the mask-mandated group compared to the no-mask group, the risk ratio remained significantly high at 1.52 (95% CI: 1.24-1.72). By analyzing the excess mortality in Kansas, this study determines that over 95% of this effect can solely be attributed to COVID-19.These findings suggest that mask use might pose a yet unknown threat to the user instead of protecting them, making mask mandates a debatable epidemiologic intervention.The cause of this trend is explained herein using the "Foegen effect" theory; that is, deep re-inhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions caught in facemasks as droplets can worsen prognosis and might be linked to long-term effects of COVID-19 infection. While the "Foegen effect" is proven in vivo in an animal model, further research is needed to fully understand it.

An update on drugs with therapeutic potential for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) treatment

The COVID-19 pandemic is one of the greatest threats to human health in the 21st century with more than 257 million cases and over 5.17 million deaths reported worldwide (as of November 23, 2021. Various agents were initially proclaimed to be effective against SARS-CoV-2, the etiological agent of COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, and ribavirin are all examples of therapeutic agents, whose efficacy against COVID-19 was later disproved. Meanwhile, concentrated efforts of researchers and clinicians worldwide have led to the identification of novel therapeutic options to control the disease including PAXLOVID™ (PF-07321332). Although COVID-19 cases are currently treated using a comprehensive approach of anticoagulants, oxygen, and antibiotics, the novel Pfizer agent PAXLOVID™ (PF-07321332), an investigational COVID-19 oral antiviral candidate, significantly reduced hospitalization time and death rates, based on an interim analysis of the phase 2/3 EPIC-HR (Evaluation of Protease Inhibition for COVID-19 in High-Risk Patients) randomized, double-blind study of non-hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19, who are at high risk of progressing to severe illness. The scheduled interim analysis demonstrated an 89 % reduction in risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization or death from any cause compared to placebo in patients treated within three days of symptom onset (primary endpoint). However, there still exists a great need for the development of additional treatments, as the recommended therapeutic options are insufficient in many cases. Thus far, mRNA and vector vaccines appear to be the most effective modalities to control the pandemic. In the current review, we provide an update on the progress that has been made since April 2020 in clinical trials concerning the effectiveness of therapies available to combat COVID-19. We focus on currently recommended therapeutic agents, including steroids, various monoclonal antibodies, remdesivir, baricitinib, anticoagulants and PAXLOVID™ summarizing the latest original studies and meta-analyses. Moreover, we aim to discuss other currently and previously studied agents targeting COVID-19 that either show no or only limited therapeutic activity. The results of recent studies report that hydroxychloroquine and convalescent plasma demonstrate no efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Lastly, we summarize the studies on various drugs with incoherent or insufficient data concerning their effectiveness, such as amantadine, ivermectin, or niclosamide.

Predictors and microbiology of respiratory and bloodstream bacterial infection in patients with COVID-19: living rapid review update and meta-regression

Background

The prevalence of bacterial infection in patients with COVID-19 is low, however, empiric antibiotic use is high. Risk stratification may be needed to minimize unnecessary empiric antibiotic use.

Objective

To identify risk factors and microbiology associated with respiratory and bloodstream bacterial infection in patients with COVID-19.

Data sources

We searched MEDLINE, OVID Epub and EMBASE for published literature up to 5 February 2021.

Study eligibility criteria

Studies including at least 50 patients with COVID-19 in any healthcare setting.

Methods

We used a validated ten-item risk of bias tool for disease prevalence. The main outcome of interest was the proportion of COVID-19 patients with bloodstream and/or respiratory bacterial co-infection and secondary infection. We performed meta-regression to identify study population factors associated with bacterial infection including healthcare setting, age, comorbidities and COVID-19 medication.

Results

Out of 33 345 studies screened, 171 were included in the final analysis. Bacterial infection data were available from 171 262 patients. The prevalence of co-infection was 5.1% (95% CI 3.6–7.1%) and secondary infection was 13.1% (95% CI 9.8–17.2%). There was a higher odds of bacterial infection in studies with a higher proportion of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) (adjusted OR 18.8, 95% CI 6.5–54.8). Female sex was associated with a lower odds of secondary infection (adjusted OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.55–0.97) but not co-infection (adjusted OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.80–1.37). The most common organisms isolated included Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase-negative staphylococci and Klebsiella species.

Conclusions

While the odds of respiratory and bloodstream bacterial infection are low in patients with COVID-19, meta-regression revealed potential risk factors for infection, including ICU setting and mechanical ventilation. The risk for secondary infection is substantially greater than the risk for co-infection in patients with COVID-19. Understanding predictors of co-infection and secondary infection may help to support improved antibiotic stewardship in patients with COVID-19.

Shared Determinants for Human Papillomavirus and COVID-19 Vaccination Intention: An Opportunity for Resource Consolidation

Purpose

This study aimed at targeting shared factors that influence the prevention of multiple diseases, which can help address various health problems simultaneously. We identified correlates of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination that overlap with COVID-19 vaccination.

Design

Cross-sectional survey data.

Setting

Online Qualtrics recruitment panel.

Subject

Religious parents of 342 adolescents who were unvaccinated for HPV (response rate was 68.1%).

Measures

Outcome variables were COVID-19 vaccination intention for (1) self, (2) child, and (3) HPV vaccination intention for child. Independent variables were psychological factors. Covariates were sociodemographic and socioeconomic factors.

Analysis

We conducted multivariate linear regressions on each outcome variable after controlling for covariates.

Result

Some psychological correlates of HPV overlapped as protective factors for all three outcomes. Higher perceived vulnerability of child to HPV was associated with higher vaccination intention against COVID-19 for self (β = .37, 95% confidence interval [CI] = .25–.48), child (β = .32, .21–.44), and HPV for child (β = .38, .27–.49). Higher perceived response efficacy of HPV vaccine was associated with greater vaccination intention against COVID-19 for self (β = .46, .33–.59), child (β = .41, .28–.53), and HPV for child (β = .75, .64–.85).

Conclusion

Given the overlap in HPV and COVID-19 vaccination correlates, interventions should target shared factors that address both diseases to maximize public health efforts. A major limitation of this study is the inability to measure the actual vaccination behavior.

Dying "from" or "with" COVID-19 during the Pandemic: Medico-Legal Issues According to a Population Perspective

There is still a lack of knowledge concerning the pathophysiology of death among COVID-19-deceased patients, and the question of whether a patient has died with or due to COVID-19 is still very much debated. In Italy, all deaths of patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 are defined as COVID-19-related, without considering pre-existing diseases that may either contribute to or even cause death. Our study included nine subjects from two different nursing homes (Cases 1–4, Group A; Cases 5–9, Group B). The latter included patients who presumably died from CO poisoning due to a heating system malfunction. All subjects tested positive for COVID-19 both ante- and post-mortem and were examined using post-mortem computed tomography prior to autopsy. COVID-19 was determined to be a contributing cause in the deaths of four out of nine subjects (death due to COVID-19; i.e., pneumonia and sudden cardiac death). In the other five cases, for which CO poisoning was identified as the cause of death, the infection presumably had no role in exitus (death with COVID-19). In our attempt to classify our patients as dying with or due to COVID-19, we found the use of complete assessments (both histological analyses and computed tomography examination) fundamental.

Frailty as a mortality predictor in older adults with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which has caused the coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, continues to spread rapidly worldwide and is associated with high rates of mortality among older adults, those with comorbidities, and those in poor physiological states. This paper aimed to systematically identify the impact of frailty on overall mortality among older adults with COVID-19. We conducted a systematic review of the literature indexed in 4 databases. A random-effects model with inverse variance-weighted meta-analysis using the odds ratio was used to study the association of frailty levels with clinical outcomes among older adults with COVID-19. Heterogeneity was measured using the I² statistic and Egger's test. We identified 22 studies that met our inclusion criteria, including 924,520 total patients. Overall, frailty among older adults was associated with high rates of COVID-19-related mortality compared with non-frail older adults (OR [odds ratio]:5.76; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 3.85-8.61, I²: 40.5%). Our results show that physical limitations, such as those associated with frailty among older adults, are associated with higher rates of COVID-19-related mortality.

Clinical frailty scale as a point of care prognostic indicator of mortality in COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 has resulted in the largest pandemic experienced since 1918, accounting for over 2 million deaths globally. Frail and older people are at the highest risk of mortality. The main objective of the present research was to quantify the impact of clinical frailty scale (CFS) by increasing severity of frailty and to identify other personal prognostic factors associated with increased mortality from COVID-19.

METHODS

This study offers a contemporary systematic review and meta-analysis to analyse the stratified mortality risk by increasing CFS sub-categories (1-3, 4-5 and 6-9). Databases searched included EMBASE, MEDLINE, CAB Abstracts, PsychInfo, and Web of Science with end-search restriction the 18th December 2020. Publications identified via MedRevix were followed up on the 23rd March 2021 in peer-reviewed database search, and citations were updated as published. Prospective and retrospective cohort studies which reported the association between CFS and COVID-19 mortality were included. Thirty-four studies were eligible for systematic review and seventeen for meta-analysis, with 81-87% (I2) heterogeneity.

FINDINGS

All studies [N: 34] included patients from a hospital setting, comprising a total of 18,042 patients with mean age 72.8 (Min: 56; Max: 86). The CFS 4-5 patient group had significantly increased mortality when compared to patients with CFS 1-3 [(RE) OR 1.95 (1.32 (95% CI), 2.87 (95% CI)); I2 81%; p = 0.0008]. Furthermore, CFS 6-9 patient group displayed an even more noticeable mortality increase when compared to patients with CFS 1-3 [(RE) OR 3.09 (2.03, 4.71); I2 87%; p<0.0001]. Generic inverse variance analysis of adjusted hazard ratio among included studies highlighted that CFS (p = 0.0001), male gender (p = 0.0009), National Early Warning Score (p = 0.0001), Ischaemic Heart Disease (IHD) (p = 0.07), Hypertension (HT) (p<0.0001), and Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) (p = 0.0009) were associated with increased COVID-19 mortality.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings suggest a differential stratification of CFS scores in the context of COVID-19 infection, in which CFS 1-3 patients may be considered at lower risk, CFS 4-5 at moderate risk, and CFS 6-9 at high risk of mortality regardless of age. Overall, our study not only aims to alert clinicians of the value of CFS scores, but also highlight the multiple dimensions to consider such as age, gender and co-morbidities, even among moderately frail patients in relation to COVID-19 mortality.

FUNDING

None.

What is the relationship between validated frailty scores and mortality for adults with COVID-19 in acute hospital care? A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The aim of this systematic review was to quantify the association between frailty and COVID-19 in relation to mortality in hospitalised patients.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, Web of Science and the grey literature were searched for papers from inception to 10 September 2020; the search was re-run in Medline up until the 9 December 2020. Screening, data extraction and quality grading were undertaken by two reviewers. Results were summarised using descriptive statistics, including a meta-analysis of overall mortality; the relationships between frailty and COVID-19 mortality were summarised narratively.

RESULTS

A total of 2,286 papers were screened resulting in 26 being included in the review. Most studies were from Europe, half from the UK, and one from Brazil; the median sample size was 242.5, median age 73.1 and 43.5% were female. In total, 22/26 used the Clinical Frailty Scale; reported mortality ranged from 14 to 65%. Most, but not all studies showed an association between increasing frailty and a greater risk of dying. Two studies indicated a sub-additive relationship between frailty, COVID-19 and death, and two studies showed no association.

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst the majority of studies have shown a positive association between COVID-19-related death and increasing frailty, some studies suggested a more nuanced understanding of frailty and outcomes in COVID-19 is needed. Clinicians should exert caution in placing too much emphasis on the influence of frailty alone when discussing likely prognosis in older people with COVID-19 illness.

Long-COVID and Post-COVID Health Complications: An Up-to-Date Review on Clinical Conditions and Their Possible Molecular Mechanisms

The COVID-19 pandemic has infected millions worldwide, leaving a global burden for long-term care of COVID-19 survivors. It is thus imperative to study post-COVID (i.e., short-term) and long-COVID (i.e., long-term) effects, specifically as local and systemic pathophysiological outcomes of other coronavirus-related diseases (such as Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS)) were well-cataloged. We conducted a comprehensive review of adverse post-COVID health outcomes and potential long-COVID effects. We observed that such adverse outcomes were not localized. Rather, they affected different human systems, including: (i) immune system (e.g., Guillain–Barré syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, pediatric inflammatory multisystem syndromes such as Kawasaki disease), (ii) hematological system (vascular hemostasis, blood coagulation), (iii) pulmonary system (respiratory failure, pulmonary thromboembolism, pulmonary embolism, pneumonia, pulmonary vascular damage, pulmonary fibrosis), (iv) cardiovascular system (myocardial hypertrophy, coronary artery atherosclerosis, focal myocardial fibrosis, acute myocardial infarction, cardiac hypertrophy), (v) gastrointestinal, hepatic, and renal systems (diarrhea, nausea/vomiting, abdominal pain, anorexia, acid reflux, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, lack of appetite/constipation), (vi) skeletomuscular system (immune-mediated skin diseases, psoriasis, lupus), (vii) nervous system (loss of taste/smell/hearing, headaches, spasms, convulsions, confusion, visual impairment, nerve pain, dizziness, impaired consciousness, nausea/vomiting, hemiplegia, ataxia, stroke, cerebral hemorrhage), (viii) mental health (stress, depression and anxiety). We additionally hypothesized mechanisms of action by investigating possible molecular mechanisms associated with these disease outcomes/symptoms. Overall, the COVID-19 pathology is still characterized by cytokine storm that results to endothelial inflammation, microvascular thrombosis, and multiple organ failures.

The nutritional status of the elderly patient infected with COVID-19: the forgotten risk factor?

BACKGROUND

Since the first cases of COVID-19 were reported in Wuhan, the nutritional status of individuals infected with the virus has not been included in the risk profiles prepared. However, nutritional status, along with other factors, is decisive in the evolution of patients with other infectious diseases. The nutritional status of individuals is considered an indicator of health status. Furthermore, optimal nutritional status transcends the individual, and poor diet in a population can be considered a group risk factor. Evidence exists on the influence that diet has on the immune system and susceptibility to disease.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the nutritional status of patients older than 65 years who were admitted due to COVID-19 and how this has influenced the evolution of patients.

DESIGN

This prospective and observational study was performed in patients with COVID-19 infection confirmed by real-time polymerase chain reaction. Data were collected from the first 24 h of admission. All patients admitted during one month to the wards assigned to COVID-19 infection were included.

RESULTS

A total of 83 patients were studied. The statistical study of mortality showed associations with age (p = .005), living in a nursing home (p = .022), a high Charlson Comorbidity Index (p = .039), hypertension (p = .032), comorbidities of dementia (p = .019) and cerebral vascular disease (p = .041), and Barthel Index (p = .010). The analysis of the influence of the nutritional state on mortality revealed a statistical association between malnutrition and mortality in the pooled data analysis (p = .005) and analysis by degrees of malnutrition (p = .27).

CONCLUSIONS

Malnutrition was a risk factor as powerful as others such as hypertension, age, and different comorbidities. We must evaluate and treat the nutritional status of elderly patients with COVID-19 infection since it directly affects their evolution.

The impact of viremia on organ failure, biomarkers and mortality in a Swedish cohort of critically ill COVID-19 patients

The spread of virus via the blood stream has been suggested to contribute to extra-pulmonary organ failure in Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We assessed SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia (RNAemia) and the association between RNAemia and inflammation, organ failure and mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients. We included all patients with PCR verified COVID-19 and consent admitted to ICU. SARS-CoV-2 RNA copies above 1000/ml measured by PCR in plasma was defined as RNAemia and used as surrogate for viremia. In this cohort of 92 patients 59 (64%) were invasively ventilated. RNAemia was found in 31 patients (34%). Hypertension and corticosteroid treatment was more common in patients with RNAemia. Extra-pulmonary organ failure biomarkers and the extent of organ failure were similar in patients with and without RNAemia, but the former group had more renal replacement therapy and higher mortality (26 vs 16%; 35 vs 16%, respectively, p = 0.04). RNAemia was not an independent predictor of death at 30 days after adjustment for age. SARS-CoV2 RNA copies in plasma is a common finding in ICU patients with COVID-19. Although viremia was not associated with extra pulmonary organ failure it was more common in patients who did not survive to 30 days after ICU admission.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials NCT04316884.

Frailty as a predictor of mortality among patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

A large number of studies have explored the association between frailty and mortality among COVID-19 patients, with inconsistent results. The aim of this meta-analysis was to synthesize the evidence on this issue.

Methods

Three databases, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, from inception to 20th January 2021 were searched for relevant literature. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess quality bias, and STATA was employed to pool the effect size by a random effects model. Additionally, potential publication bias and sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results

Fifteen studies were included, with a total of 23,944 COVID-19 patients, for quantitative analysis. Overall, the pooled prevalence of frailty was 51% (95% CI: 44–59%). Patients with frailty who were infected with COVID-19 had an increased risk of mortality compared to those without frailty, and the pooled hazard ratio (HR) and odds ratio (OR) were 1.99 (95% CI: 1.66–2.38) and 2.48 (95% CI: 1.78–3.46), respectively. In addition, subgroup analysis based on population showed that the pooled ORs for hospitalized patients in eight studies and nursing home residents in two studies were 2.62 (95% CI: 1.68–4.07) and 2.09 (95% CI: 1.40–3.11), respectively. Subgroup analysis using the frailty assessment tool indicated that this association still existed when using the clinical frailty scale (CFS) (assessed in 6 studies, pooled OR = 2.88, 95% CI: 1.52–5.45; assessed in 5 studies, pooled HR = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.66–2.38) and other frailty tools (assessed in 4 studies, pooled OR = 1.98, 95% CI: 1.81–2.16). In addition, these significant positive associations still existed in the subgroup analysis based on study design and geographic region.

Conclusion

Our study indicates that frailty is an independent predictor of mortality among patients with COVID-19. Thus, frailty could be a prognostic factor for clinicians to stratify high-risk groups and remind doctors and nurses to perform early screening and corresponding interventions urgently needed to reduce mortality rates in patients infected by SARS-CoV-2.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-021-02138-5.

Prediction of COVID-19 mortality among hospitalized patients in Sudan.. [DOI: 10.1101/2021.03.09.21253179] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0]

Background

COVID-19 was primarily reported in China. The mortality rate across countries had ranged from 1% up to more than 10% and it is underestimated in some countries. Advanced age is the most frequently reported factor associated to mortality. Other factors were the presence of comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus, hypertension and obesity. Several models for mortality prediction had been developed to assist in improving the prognosis. The aim of our study was to assess the factors related to mortality among COVID-19 patients and develop a prediction model based on these factors.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study assessed the factors related to the mortality among COVID-19 patients who attended Imperial Hospital isolation centre on November-December, 2020, Khartoum, Sudan. Statistical tests performed were chi-square test, odds ratio and regression to develop the prediction model. Tests were considered statistically significant whenp< 0.05.

Results

105 patients were studied. 29% of the patients were deceased, while, 71% were discharged alive. A statistically significant association was found between the age and severity with regards to mortality rate (p=0.034, 0.018 respectively). The model equation for mortality prediction: Mortality = −14.724+ (1.387* Age) + (−0.323* Gender) + (1.814* Admission) + (0.193* Ischemic Heart Disease) + (−0.369* Fever) + (1.595* Cough) + (1.953* Complications) + (0.149* Duration of hospitalization) + (0.999* Enoxaparin dose).

Conclusions

Age, admission ward, cough and enoxaparin dose were statistically significant predictors for COVID-19 mortality (p= 0.014, 0.011, 0.015, 0.006 respectively).

Methylprednisolone in adults hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia : An open-label randomized trial (GLUCOCOVID)

PURPOSE

To determine whether a 6-day course of methylprednisolone (MP) improves outcome in patients with severe SARS-CoV‑2 (Corona Virus Disease 2019 [COVID-19]).

METHODS

The study was a multicentric open-label trial of COVID-19 patients who were aged ≥ 18 years, receiving oxygen without mechanical ventilation, and with evidence of systemic inflammatory response who were assigned to standard of care (SOC) or SOC plus intravenous MP (40 mg bid for 3 days followed by 20 mg bid for 3 days). The primary outcome was a composite of death, admission to the intensive care unit, or requirement for noninvasive ventilation. Both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 91 patients were screened, and 64 were randomized (mean age70 ± 12 years). In the ITT analysis, 14 of 29 patients (48%) in the SOC group and 14 of 35 (40%) in the MP group suffered the composite endpoint (40% versus 20% in patients under 72 years and 67% versus 48% in those over 72 years; p = 0.25). In the PP analysis, patients on MP had a significantly lower risk of experiencing the composite endpoint (age-adjusted risk ratio 0.42; 95% confidence interval, CI 0.20-0.89; p = 0.043).

CONCLUSION

The planned sample size was not achieved, and our results should therefore be interpreted with caution. The use of MP had no significant effect on the primary endpoint in ITT analysis; however, the PP analysis showed a beneficial effect due to MP, which consistent with other published trials support the use of glucocorticoids in severe cases of COVID-19.