Characterization of Post-COVID-19 Definitions and Clinical Coding Practices: Longitudinal Study

BACKGROUND

Post-COVID-19 condition (colloquially known as "long COVID-19") characterized as postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 has no universal clinical case definition. Recent efforts have focused on understanding long COVID-19 symptoms, and electronic health record (EHR) data provide a unique resource for understanding this condition. The introduction of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) code U09.9 for "Post COVID-19 condition, unspecified" to identify patients with long COVID-19 has provided a method of evaluating this condition in EHRs; however, the accuracy of this code is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to characterize the utility and accuracy of the U09.9 code across 3 health care systems-the Veterans Health Administration, the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, and the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center-against patients identified with long COVID-19 via a chart review by operationalizing the World Health Organization (WHO) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) definitions.

METHODS

Patients who were COVID-19 positive with either a U07.1 ICD-10 code or positive polymerase chain reaction test within these health care systems were identified for chart review. Among this cohort, we sampled patients based on two approaches: (1) with a U09.9 code and (2) without a U09.9 code but with a new onset long COVID-19-related ICD-10 code, which allows us to assess the sensitivity of the U09.9 code. To operationalize the long COVID-19 definition based on health agency guidelines, symptoms were grouped into a "core" cluster of 11 commonly reported symptoms among patients with long COVID-19 and an extended cluster that captured all other symptoms by disease domain. Patients having ≥2 symptoms persisting for ≥60 days that were new onset after their COVID-19 infection, with ≥1 symptom in the core cluster, were labeled as having long COVID-19 per chart review. The code's performance was compared across 3 health care systems and across different time periods of the pandemic.

RESULTS

Overall, 900 patient charts were reviewed across 3 health care systems. The prevalence of long COVID-19 among the cohort with the U09.9 ICD-10 code based on the operationalized WHO definition was between 23.2% and 62.4% across these health care systems. We also evaluated a less stringent version of the WHO definition and the CDC definition and observed an increase in the prevalence of long COVID-19 at all 3 health care systems.

CONCLUSIONS

This is one of the first studies to evaluate the U09.9 code against a clinical case definition for long COVID-19, as well as the first to apply this definition to EHR data using a chart review approach on a nationwide cohort across multiple health care systems. This chart review approach can be implemented at other EHR systems to further evaluate the utility and performance of the U09.9 code.

Neurological diagnoses in hospitalized COVID-19 patients associated with adverse outcomes: A multinational cohort study

Few studies examining the patient outcomes of concurrent neurological manifestations during acute COVID-19 leveraged multinational cohorts of adults and children or distinguished between central and peripheral nervous system (CNS vs. PNS) involvement. Using a federated multinational network in which local clinicians and informatics experts curated the electronic health records data, we evaluated the risk of prolonged hospitalization and mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients from 21 healthcare systems across 7 countries. For adults, we used a federated learning approach whereby we ran Cox proportional hazard models locally at each healthcare system and performed a meta-analysis on the aggregated results to estimate the overall risk of adverse outcomes across our geographically diverse populations. For children, we reported descriptive statistics separately due to their low frequency of neurological involvement and poor outcomes. Among the 106,229 hospitalized COVID-19 patients (104,031 patients ≥18 years; 2,198 patients <18 years, January 2020-October 2021), 15,101 (14%) had at least one CNS diagnosis, while 2,788 (3%) had at least one PNS diagnosis. After controlling for demographics and pre-existing conditions, adults with CNS involvement had longer hospital stay (11 versus 6 days) and greater risk of (Hazard Ratio = 1.78) and faster time to death (12 versus 24 days) than patients with no neurological condition (NNC) during acute COVID-19 hospitalization. Adults with PNS involvement also had longer hospital stay but lower risk of mortality than the NNC group. Although children had a low frequency of neurological involvement during COVID-19 hospitalization, a substantially higher proportion of children with CNS involvement died compared to those with NNC (6% vs 1%). Overall, patients with concurrent CNS manifestation during acute COVID-19 hospitalization faced greater risks for adverse clinical outcomes than patients without any neurological diagnosis. Our global informatics framework using a federated approach (versus a centralized data collection approach) has utility for clinical discovery beyond COVID-19.

Characterization of long COVID temporal sub-phenotypes by distributed representation learning from electronic health record data: a cohort study

Background

Characterizing Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID (SARS-CoV-2 Infection), or PASC has been challenging due to the multitude of sub-phenotypes, temporal attributes, and definitions. Scalable characterization of PASC sub-phenotypes can enhance screening capacities, disease management, and treatment planning.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective multi-centre observational cohort study, leveraging longitudinal electronic health record (EHR) data of 30,422 patients from three healthcare systems in the Consortium for the Clinical Characterization of COVID-19 by EHR (4CE). From the total cohort, we applied a deductive approach on 12,424 individuals with follow-up data and developed a distributed representation learning process for providing augmented definitions for PASC sub-phenotypes.

Findings

Our framework characterized seven PASC sub-phenotypes. We estimated that on average 15.7% of the hospitalized COVID-19 patients were likely to suffer from at least one PASC symptom and almost 5.98%, on average, had multiple symptoms. Joint pain and dyspnea had the highest prevalence, with an average prevalence of 5.45% and 4.53%, respectively.

Interpretation

We provided a scalable framework to every participating healthcare system for estimating PASC sub-phenotypes prevalence and temporal attributes, thus developing a unified model that characterizes augmented sub-phenotypes across the different systems.

Funding

Authors are supported by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institute on Aging, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Medical Research Council, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, European Union, National Institutes of Health, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.

A retrospective cohort analysis leveraging augmented intelligence to characterize long COVID in the electronic health record: A precision medicine framework

Physical and psychological symptoms lasting months following an acute COVID-19 infection are now recognized as post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC). Accurate tools for identifying such patients could enhance screening capabilities for the recruitment for clinical trials, improve the reliability of disease estimates, and allow for more accurate downstream cohort analysis. In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed the EHR of hospitalized COVID-19 patients across three healthcare systems to develop a pipeline for better identifying patients with persistent PASC symptoms (dyspnea, fatigue, or joint pain) after their SARS-CoV-2 infection. We implemented distributed representation learning powered by the Machine Learning for modeling Health Outcomes (MLHO) to identify novel EHR features that could suggest PASC symptoms outside of typical diagnosis codes. MLHO applies an entropy-based feature selection and boosting algorithms for representation mining. These improved definitions were then used for estimating PASC among hospitalized patients. 30,422 hospitalized patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 across three healthcare systems between March 13, 2020 and February 28, 2021. The mean age of the population was 62.3 years (SD, 21.0 years) and 15,124 (49.7%) were female. We implemented the distributed representation learning technique to augment PASC definitions. These definitions were found to have positive predictive values of 0.73, 0.74, and 0.91 for dyspnea, fatigue, and joint pain, respectively. We estimated that 25 percent (CI 95%: 6-48), 11 percent (CI 95%: 6-15), and 13 percent (CI 95%: 8-17) of hospitalized COVID-19 patients will have dyspnea, fatigue, and joint pain, respectively, 3 months or longer after a COVID-19 diagnosis. We present a validated framework for screening and identifying patients with PASC in the EHR and then use the tool to estimate its prevalence among hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Informative missingness: What can we learn from patterns in missing laboratory data in the electronic health record?

BACKGROUND

In electronic health records, patterns of missing laboratory test results could capture patients' course of disease as well as ​​reflect clinician's concerns or worries for possible conditions. These patterns are often understudied and overlooked. This study aims to identify informative patterns of missingness among laboratory data collected across 15 healthcare system sites in three countries for COVID-19 inpatients.

METHODS

We collected and analyzed demographic, diagnosis, and laboratory data for 69,939 patients with positive COVID-19 PCR tests across three countries from 1 January 2020 through 30 September 2021. We analyzed missing laboratory measurements across sites, missingness stratification by demographic variables, temporal trends of missingness, correlations between labs based on missingness indicators over time, and clustering of groups of labs based on their missingness/ordering pattern.

RESULTS

With these analyses, we identified mapping issues faced in seven out of 15 sites. We also identified nuances in data collection and variable definition for the various sites. Temporal trend analyses may support the use of laboratory test result missingness patterns in identifying severe COVID-19 patients. Lastly, using missingness patterns, we determined relationships between various labs that reflect clinical behaviors.

CONCLUSION

In this work, we use computational approaches to relate missingness patterns to hospital treatment capacity and highlight the heterogeneity of looking at COVID-19 over time and at multiple sites, where there might be different phases, policies, etc. Changes in missingness could suggest a change in a patient's condition, and patterns of missingness among laboratory measurements could potentially identify clinical outcomes. This allows sites to consider missing data as informative to analyses and help researchers identify which sites are better poised to study particular questions.

Long-term kidney function recovery and mortality after COVID-19-associated acute kidney injury: An international multi-centre observational cohort study

Background

While acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication in COVID-19, data on post-AKI kidney function recovery and the clinical factors associated with poor kidney function recovery is lacking.

Methods

A retrospective multi-centre observational cohort study comprising 12,891 hospitalized patients aged 18 years or older with a diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by polymerase chain reaction from 1 January 2020 to 10 September 2020, and with at least one serum creatinine value 1-365 days prior to admission. Mortality and serum creatinine values were obtained up to 10 September 2021.

Findings

Advanced age (HR 2.77, 95%CI 2.53-3.04, p < 0.0001), severe COVID-19 (HR 2.91, 95%CI 2.03-4.17, p < 0.0001), severe AKI (KDIGO stage 3: HR 4.22, 95%CI 3.55-5.00, p < 0.0001), and ischemic heart disease (HR 1.26, 95%CI 1.14-1.39, p < 0.0001) were associated with worse mortality outcomes. AKI severity (KDIGO stage 3: HR 0.41, 95%CI 0.37-0.46, p < 0.0001) was associated with worse kidney function recovery, whereas remdesivir use (HR 1.34, 95%CI 1.17-1.54, p < 0.0001) was associated with better kidney function recovery. In a subset of patients without chronic kidney disease, advanced age (HR 1.38, 95%CI 1.20-1.58, p < 0.0001), male sex (HR 1.67, 95%CI 1.45-1.93, p < 0.0001), severe AKI (KDIGO stage 3: HR 11.68, 95%CI 9.80-13.91, p < 0.0001), and hypertension (HR 1.22, 95%CI 1.10-1.36, p = 0.0002) were associated with post-AKI kidney function impairment. Furthermore, patients with COVID-19-associated AKI had significant and persistent elevations of baseline serum creatinine 125% or more at 180 days (RR 1.49, 95%CI 1.32-1.67) and 365 days (RR 1.54, 95%CI 1.21-1.96) compared to COVID-19 patients with no AKI.

Interpretation

COVID-19-associated AKI was associated with higher mortality, and severe COVID-19-associated AKI was associated with worse long-term post-AKI kidney function recovery.

Funding

Authors are supported by various funders, with full details stated in the acknowledgement section.

SurvMaximin: Robust federated approach to transporting survival risk prediction models

OBJECTIVE

For multi-center heterogeneous Real-World Data (RWD) with time-to-event outcomes and high-dimensional features, we propose the SurvMaximin algorithm to estimate Cox model feature coefficients for a target population by borrowing summary information from a set of health care centers without sharing patient-level information.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For each of the centers from which we want to borrow information to improve the prediction performance for the target population, a penalized Cox model is fitted to estimate feature coefficients for the center. Using estimated feature coefficients and the covariance matrix of the target population, we then obtain a SurvMaximin estimated set of feature coefficients for the target population. The target population can be an entire cohort comprised of all centers, corresponding to federated learning, or a single center, corresponding to transfer learning.

RESULTS

Simulation studies and a real-world international electronic health records application study, with 15 participating health care centers across three countries (France, Germany, and the U.S.), show that the proposed SurvMaximin algorithm achieves comparable or higher accuracy compared with the estimator using only the information of the target site and other existing methods. The SurvMaximin estimator is robust to variations in sample sizes and estimated feature coefficients between centers, which amounts to significantly improved estimates for target sites with fewer observations.

CONCLUSIONS

The SurvMaximin method is well suited for both federated and transfer learning in the high-dimensional survival analysis setting. SurvMaximin only requires a one-time summary information exchange from participating centers. Estimated regression vectors can be very heterogeneous. SurvMaximin provides robust Cox feature coefficient estimates without outcome information in the target population and is privacy-preserving.

International electronic health record-derived post-acute sequelae profiles of COVID-19 patients

The risk profiles of post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) have not been well characterized in multi-national settings with appropriate controls. We leveraged electronic health record (EHR) data from 277 international hospitals representing 414,602 patients with COVID-19, 2.3 million control patients without COVID-19 in the inpatient and outpatient settings, and over 221 million diagnosis codes to systematically identify new-onset conditions enriched among patients with COVID-19 during the post-acute period. Compared to inpatient controls, inpatient COVID-19 cases were at significant risk for angina pectoris (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.09–1.55), heart failure (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.10–1.35), cognitive dysfunctions (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.07–1.31), and fatigue (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.07–1.30). Relative to outpatient controls, outpatient COVID-19 cases were at risk for pulmonary embolism (RR 2.10, 95% CI 1.58–2.76), venous embolism (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.17–1.54), atrial fibrillation (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.13–1.50), type 2 diabetes (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.16–1.36) and vitamin D deficiency (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.09–1.30). Outpatient COVID-19 cases were also at risk for loss of smell and taste (RR 2.42, 95% CI 1.90–3.06), inflammatory neuropathy (RR 1.66, 95% CI 1.21–2.27), and cognitive dysfunction (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.04–1.33). The incidence of post-acute cardiovascular and pulmonary conditions decreased across time among inpatient cases while the incidence of cardiovascular, digestive, and metabolic conditions increased among outpatient cases. Our study, based on a federated international network, systematically identified robust conditions associated with PASC compared to control groups, underscoring the multifaceted cardiovascular and neurological phenotype profiles of PASC.

Changes in laboratory value improvement and mortality rates over the course of the pandemic: an international retrospective cohort study of hospitalised patients infected with SARS-CoV-2

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.

Distinguishing Admissions Specifically for COVID-19 From Incidental SARS-CoV-2 Admissions: National Retrospective Electronic Health Record Study

BACKGROUND

Admissions are generally classified as COVID-19 hospitalizations if the patient has a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. However, because 35% of SARS-CoV-2 infections are asymptomatic, patients admitted for unrelated indications with an incidentally positive test could be misclassified as a COVID-19 hospitalization. Electronic health record (EHR)-based studies have been unable to distinguish between a hospitalization specifically for COVID-19 versus an incidental SARS-CoV-2 hospitalization. Although the need to improve classification of COVID-19 versus incidental SARS-CoV-2 is well understood, the magnitude of the problems has only been characterized in small, single-center studies. Furthermore, there have been no peer-reviewed studies evaluating methods for improving classification.

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study are to, first, quantify the frequency of incidental hospitalizations over the first 15 months of the pandemic in multiple hospital systems in the United States and, second, to apply electronic phenotyping techniques to automatically improve COVID-19 hospitalization classification.

METHODS

From a retrospective EHR-based cohort in 4 US health care systems in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Illinois, a random sample of 1123 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive patients hospitalized from March 2020 to August 2021 was manually chart-reviewed and classified as "admitted with COVID-19" (incidental) versus specifically admitted for COVID-19 ("for COVID-19"). EHR-based phenotyping was used to find feature sets to filter out incidental admissions.

RESULTS

EHR-based phenotyped feature sets filtered out incidental admissions, which occurred in an average of 26% of hospitalizations (although this varied widely over time, from 0% to 75%). The top site-specific feature sets had 79%-99% specificity with 62%-75% sensitivity, while the best-performing across-site feature sets had 71%-94% specificity with 69%-81% sensitivity.

CONCLUSIONS

A large proportion of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive admissions were incidental. Straightforward EHR-based phenotypes differentiated admissions, which is important to assure accurate public health reporting and research.

Distinguishing Admissions Specifically for COVID-19 from Incidental SARS-CoV-2 Admissions: A National EHR Research Consortium Study

Admissions are generally classified as COVID-19 hospitalizations if the patient has a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. However, because 35% of SARS-CoV-2 infections are asymptomatic, patients admitted for unrelated indications with an incidentally positive test could be misclassified as a COVID-19 hospitalization. EHR-based studies have been unable to distinguish between a hospitalization specifically for COVID-19 versus an incidental SARS-CoV-2 hospitalization. From a retrospective EHR-based cohort in four US healthcare systems, a random sample of 1,123 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive patients hospitalized between 3/2020â€"8/2021 was manually chart-reviewed and classified as admitted-with-COVID-19 (incidental) vs. specifically admitted for COVID-19 (for-COVID-19). EHR-based phenotyped feature sets filtered out incidental admissions, which occurred in 26%. The top site-specific feature sets had 79-99% specificity with 62-75% sensitivity, while the best performing across-site feature set had 71-94% specificity with 69-81% sensitivity. A large proportion of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive admissions were incidental. Straightforward EHR-based phenotypes differentiated admissions, which is important to assure accurate public health reporting and research.

International Changes in COVID-19 Clinical Trajectories Across 315 Hospitals and 6 Countries: Retrospective Cohort Study

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.