Validation of International Classification of Disease-10 Code for Identifying Children Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease-2019

Prescribing Patterns of Nonrecommended Medications for Children With Acute COVID-19

OBJECTIVE

Repurposed medications for acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continued to be prescribed after results from rigorous studies and national guidelines discouraged use. We aimed to describe prescribing rates of nonrecommended medications for acute COVID-19 in children, associations with demographic factors, and provider type and specialty.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort of children <18 years in a large United States all-payer claims database, we identified prescriptions within 2 weeks of an acute COVID-19 diagnosis. We calculated prescription rate, performed multivariable logistic regression to identify risk factors, and described prescriber type and specialty during nonrecommended periods defined by national guidelines.

RESULTS

We identified 3 082 626 COVID-19 diagnoses in 2 949 118 children between March 7, 2020 and December 31, 2022. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and ivermectin were prescribed in 0.03% and 0.14% of COVID-19 cases, respectively, during nonrecommended periods (after September 12, 2020 for HCQ and February 5, 2021 for ivermectin) with considerable variation by state. Prescription rates were 4 times the national average in Arkansas (HCQ) and Oklahoma (ivermectin). Older age, nonpublic insurance, and emergency department or urgent care visit were associated with increased risk of either prescription. Additionally, residence in nonurban and low-income areas was associated with ivermectin prescription. General practitioners had the highest rates of prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

Although nonrecommended medication prescription rates were low, the overall COVID-19 burden translated into high numbers of ineffective and potentially harmful prescriptions. Understanding overuse patterns can help mitigate downstream consequences of misinformation. Reaching providers and parents with clear evidence-based recommendations is crucial to children's health.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 COVID-19 primary series vaccination in children aged 5-17 years in the United States: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccines are authorized for use in children in the United States; real-world assessment of vaccine effectiveness in children is needed. This study's objective was to estimate the effectiveness of receiving a complete primary series of monovalent BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 vaccine in US children.

METHODS

This cohort study identified children aged 5-17 years vaccinated with BNT162b2 matched with unvaccinated children. Participants and BNT162b2 vaccinations were identified in Optum and CVS Health insurance administrative claims databases linked with Immunization Information System (IIS) COVID-19 vaccination records from 16 US jurisdictions between December 11, 2020, and May 31, 2022 (end date varied by database and IIS). Vaccinated children were followed from their first BNT162b2 dose and matched to unvaccinated children on calendar date, US county of residence, and demographic and clinical factors. Censoring occurred if vaccinated children failed to receive a timely dose 2 or if unvaccinated children received any dose. Two COVID-19 outcome definitions were evaluated: COVID-19 diagnosis in any medical setting and COVID-19 diagnosis in hospitals/emergency departments (EDs). Propensity score-weighted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated with Cox proportional hazards models, and vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated as 1 minus HR. VE was estimated overall, within age subgroups, and within variant-specific eras. Sensitivity, negative control, and quantitative bias analyses evaluated various potential biases.

RESULTS

There were 453,655 eligible vaccinated children one-to-one matched to unvaccinated comparators (mean age 12 years; 50% female). COVID-19 hospitalizations/ED visits were rare in children, regardless of vaccination status (Optum, 41.2 per 10,000 person-years; CVS Health, 44.1 per 10,000 person-years). Overall, vaccination was associated with reduced incidence of any medically diagnosed COVID-19 (meta-analyzed VE = 38% [95% CI, 36-40%]) and hospital/ED-diagnosed COVID-19 (meta-analyzed VE = 61% [95% CI, 56-65%]). VE estimates were lowest among children 5-11 years and during the Omicron-variant era.

CONCLUSIONS

Receipt of a complete BNT162b2 vaccine primary series was associated with overall reduced medically diagnosed COVID-19 and hospital/ED-diagnosed COVID-19 in children; observed VE estimates differed by age group and variant era.

REGISTRATION

The study protocol was publicly posted on the BEST Initiative website ( https://bestinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/C19-VX-Effectiveness-Protocol_2022_508.pdf ).

Effectiveness of monovalent COVID-19 booster/additional vaccine doses in the United States

Background

Monovalent booster/additional doses of COVID-19 vaccines were first authorized in August 2021 in the United States. We evaluated the real-world effectiveness of receipt of a monovalent booster/additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine compared with receiving a primary vaccine series without a booster/additional dose.

Methods

Cohorts of individuals receiving a COVID-19 booster/additional dose after receipt of a complete primary vaccine series were identified in 2 administrative insurance claims databases (Optum, CVS Health) supplemented with state immunization information system data between August 2021 and March 2022. Individuals with a complete primary series but without a booster/additional dose were one-to-one matched to boosted individuals on calendar date, geography, and clinical factors. COVID-19 diagnoses were identified in any medical setting, or specifically in hospitals/emergency departments (EDs). Propensity score-weighted hazards ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated with Cox proportional hazards models; vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated as 1 minus the HR by vaccine brand overall and within subgroups of variant-specific eras, immunocompromised status, and homologous/heterologous booster status.

Results

Across both data sources, we identified 752,165 matched pairs for BNT162b2, 410,501 for mRNA-1273, and 11,398 for JNJ-7836735. For any medically diagnosed COVID-19, meta-analyzed VE estimates for BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and JNJ-7836735, respectively, were: BNT162b2, 54% (95% CI, 53%-56%); mRNA-1273, 58% (95% CI, 56%-59%); JNJ-7836735, 34% (95% CI, 23%-44%). For hospital/ED-diagnosed COVID-19, VE estimates ranged from 70% to 76%. VE was generally lower during the Omicron era than the Delta era and for immunocompromised individuals. There was little difference observed by homologous or heterologous booster status.

Conclusion

The original, monovalent booster/additional doses were reasonably effective in real-world use among the populations for which they were indicated during the study period. Additional studies may be informative in the future as new variants emerge and new vaccines become available.Registration: The study protocol was publicly posted on the BEST Initiative website (https://bestinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/C19-VX-Effectiveness-Protocol_2022_508.pdf).

Comparison of clinician diagnosis of COVID-19 with real time polymerase chain reaction in an adult-representative population in Sweden

BACKGROUND

Due to the high transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2, accurate diagnosis is essential for effective infection control, but the gold standard, real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), is costly, slow, and test capacity has at times been insufficient. We compared the accuracy of clinician diagnosis of COVID-19 against RT-PCR in a general adult population.

METHODS

COVID-19 diagnosis data by 30th September 2021 for participants in an ongoing population-based cohort study of adults in Western Sweden were retrieved from registers, based on positive RT-PCR and clinician diagnosis using recommended ICD-10 codes. We calculated accuracy measures of clinician diagnosis using RT-PCR as reference for all subjects and stratified by age, gender, BMI, and comorbidity collected pre-COVID-19.

RESULTS

Of 42,621 subjects, 3,936 (9.2%) and 5705 (13.4%) had had COVID-19 identified by RT-PCR and clinician diagnosis, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of clinician diagnosis against RT-PCR were 78% (95%CI 77-80%) and 93% (95%CI 93-93%), respectively. Positive predictive value (PPV) was 54% (95%CI 53-55%), while negative predictive value (NPV) was 98% (95%CI 98-98%) and Youden's index 71% (95%CI 70-72%). These estimates were similar between men and women, across age groups, BMI categories, and between patients with and without asthma. However, while specificity, NPV, and Youden's index were similar between patients with and without chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), sensitivity was slightly higher in patients with (84% [95%CI 74-90%]) than those without (78% [95%CI 77-79%]) COPD.

CONCLUSIONS

The accuracy of clinician diagnosis for COVID-19 is adequate, regardless of gender, age, BMI, and asthma, and thus can be used for screening purposes to supplement RT-PCR.

COVID-19 and Acute Neurologic Complications in Children

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the epidemiology and outcomes of neurologic complications associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in children.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study of children 2 months to <18 years of age with COVID-19 discharged from 52 children's hospitals from March 2020 to March 2022. Neurologic complications were defined as encephalopathy, encephalitis, aseptic meningitis, febrile seizure, nonfebrile seizure, brain abscess and bacterial meningitis, Reye's syndrome, and cerebral infarction. We assessed length of stay (LOS), ICU admission, 30 day readmissions, deaths, and hospital costs. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with neurologic complications.

RESULTS

Of 15 137 children hospitalized with COVID-19, 1060 (7.0%) had a concurrent diagnosis of a neurologic complication. The most frequent neurologic complications were febrile seizures (3.9%), nonfebrile seizures (2.3%), and encephalopathy (2.2%). Hospital LOS, ICU admission, ICU LOS, 30 day readmissions, deaths, and hospital costs were higher in children with neurologic complications compared with those without complications. Factors associated with lower odds of neurologic complications included: younger age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96-0.98), occurrence during delta variant predominant time period (aOR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.57-0.87), presence of a nonneurologic complex chronic condition (aOR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.69-0.94). The presence of a neurologic complex chronic condition was associated with higher odds of neurologic complication (aOR 4.14, 95% CI 3.48-4.92).

CONCLUSIONS

Neurologic complications are common in children hospitalized with COVID-19 and are associated with worse hospital outcomes. Our findings emphasize the importance of COVID-19 immunization in children, especially in high-risk populations, such as those with neurologic comorbidity.

Medications and Adherence to Treatment Guidelines Among Children Hospitalized With Acute COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment guidelines rapidly evolved during the pandemic. The December 2020 Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guideline, endorsed by the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, recommended steroids for critical disease, and suggested steroids and remdesivir for severe disease. We evaluated how medications for children hospitalized with COVID-19 changed after guideline publication.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of children aged 30 days to <18 years hospitalized with acute COVID-19 at 42 tertiary care US children's hospitals April 2020 to December 2021. We compared medication use before and after the December 2020 IDSA guideline (pre- and postguideline) stratified by COVID-19 disease severity (mild-moderate, severe, critical) with interrupted time series.

RESULTS

Among 18 364 patients who met selection criteria, 80.3% were discharged in the postguideline period. Remdesivir and steroid use increased postguideline relative to the preguideline period, although the trend slowed. Postguideline, among patients with severe disease, 75.4% received steroids and 55.2% remdesivir, and in those with critical disease, 82.4% received steroids and 41.4% remdesivir. Compared with preguideline, enoxaparin use increased overall but decreased among patients with critical disease. Postguideline, tocilizumab use increased and hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, anakinra, and antibiotic use decreased. Antibiotic use remained high in severe (51.7%) and critical disease (81%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although utilization of COVID-19 medications changed after December 2020 IDSA guidelines, there was a decline in uptake and incomplete adherence for children with severe and critical disease. Efforts should enhance reliable delivery of guideline-directed therapies to children hospitalized with COVID-19 and assess their effectiveness.

Performance of diagnostic coding and laboratory testing results to measure COVID-19 during pregnancy and associations with pregnancy outcomes

BACKGROUND

Large-scale evaluation of COVID-19 is likely to rely on the quality of ICD coding. However, little is known about the validity of ICD-coded COVID-19 diagnoses.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the performance of diagnostic codes in detecting COVID-19 during pregnancy.

METHODS

We used data from a national cohort of 78,283 individuals with a pregnancy ending between 11 March 2020 and 31 January 2021 in the OptumLabs^® Data Warehouse (OLDW). OLDW is a longitudinal, real-world data asset with de-identified administrative claims and electronic health record data. We identified all services with an ICD-10-CM diagnostic code of U07.1 and all laboratory claims records for COVID-19 diagnostic testing. We compared ICD-coded diagnoses to testing results to estimate positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV). To evaluate impact on risk estimation, we estimated risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes by source of exposure information.

RESULTS

Of 78,283 pregnancies, 5644 had a laboratory test result for COVID-19. Testing was most common among older individuals, Hispanic individuals, those with higher socioeconomic status and those with a diagnosed medical condition or pregnancy complication; 52% of COVID-19 cases was identified through ICD-coded diagnosis alone, 19% from laboratory test results alone and 29% from both sources. Agreement between ICD-coded diagnosis and laboratory testing records was high 91% (95% confidence interval [CI] 90, 92). However, the PPV of ICD-code diagnosis was low (36%; 95% CI 33, 39). We observed up to a 50% difference in risk estimates of adverse pregnancy outcomes when exposure was based on laboratory testing results or diagnostic coding alone.

CONCLUSIONS

More than one-in-five COVID-19 cases would be missed by using ICD-coded diagnoses alone to identify COVID-19 during pregnancy. Epidemiological studies exclusively relying on diagnostic coding or laboratory testing results are likely to be affected by exposure misclassification. Research and surveillance should draw upon multiple sources of COVID-19 diagnostic information.

Real-World Evidence of COVID-19 Patients' Data Quality in the Electronic Health Records

Despite the importance of electronic health records data, less attention has been given to data quality. This study aimed to evaluate the quality of COVID-19 patients' records and their readiness for secondary use. We conducted a retrospective chart review study of all COVID-19 inpatients in an academic healthcare hospital for the year 2020, which were identified using ICD-10 codes and case definition guidelines. COVID-19 signs and symptoms were higher in unstructured clinical notes than in structured coded data. COVID-19 cases were categorized as 218 (66.46%) "confirmed cases", 10 (3.05%) "probable cases", 9 (2.74%) "suspected cases", and 91 (27.74%) "no sufficient evidence". The identification of "probable cases" and "suspected cases" was more challenging than "confirmed cases" where laboratory confirmation was sufficient. The accuracy of the COVID-19 case identification was higher in laboratory tests than in ICD-10 codes. When validating using laboratory results, we found that ICD-10 codes were inaccurately assigned to 238 (72.56%) patients' records. "No sufficient evidence" records might indicate inaccurate and incomplete EHR data. Data quality evaluation should be incorporated to ensure patient safety and data readiness for secondary use research and predictive analytics. We encourage educational and training efforts to motivate healthcare providers regarding the importance of accurate documentation at the point-of-care.

Factors Associated With COVID-19 Disease Severity in US Children and Adolescents

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the clinical factors associated with COVID-19 disease severity in children and adolescents.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study across 45 US children's hospitals between April 2020 to September 2020 of pediatric patients discharged with a primary diagnosis of COVID-19. We assessed factors associated with hospitalization and factors associated with clinical severity (eg, admission to inpatient floor, admission to intensive care unit [ICU], admission to ICU with mechanical ventilation, shock, death) among those hospitalized.

RESULTS

Among 19,976 COVID-19 encounters, 15,913 (79.7%) patients were discharged from the emergency department (ED) and 4063 (20.3%) were hospitalized. The clinical severity distribution among those hospitalized was moderate (3222, 79.3%), severe (431, 11.3%), and very severe (380, 9.4%). Factors associated with hospitalization vs discharge from the ED included private payor insurance (adjusted odds ratio [aOR],1.16; 95% CI, 1.1-1.3), obesity/type 2 diabetes mellitus (type 2 DM) (aOR, 10.4; 95% CI, 8.9-13.3), asthma (aOR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.3-1.6), cardiovascular disease, (aOR, 5.0; 95% CI, 4.3- 5.8), immunocompromised condition (aOR, 5.9; 95% CI, 5.0-6.7), pulmonary disease (aOR, 5.3; 95% CI, 3.4-8.2), and neurologic disease (aOR, 3.2; 95% CI, 2.7-5.8). Among children and adolescents hospitalized with COVID-19, greater disease severity was associated with Black or other non-White race; age greater than 4 years; and obesity/type 2 DM, cardiovascular, neuromuscular, and pulmonary conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Among children and adolescents presenting to US children's hospital EDs with COVID-19, 20% were hospitalized; of these, 21% received care in the ICU. Older children and adolescents had a lower risk for hospitalization but more severe illness when hospitalized. There were differences in disease severity by race and ethnicity and the presence of selected comorbidities. These factors should be taken into consideration when prioritizing mitigation and vaccination strategies.