Risk Factors and Survival Analysis of COVID-19 Among Health Care Workers in West Jakarta Hospital.

BACKGROUND: The first two cases of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) were identified in Indonesia on March 2nd, 2020. Health Care workers (HCWs) are at risk of contracting COVID-19 infection. This study analyzed the risk factors, compared the prevalence rate of COVID-19 between HCWs and non-HCWs, and investigated survival analysis describing the time risk of COVID-19. METHODS: This prospective cohort study retrieved data from the Hospital Surveillance Team (one of the largest hospitals in West Jakarta) which were analyzed using descriptive, bivariate analysis, Survival Analysis through the Kaplan-Meier method, and multivariate Cox analysis. RESULTS: Observations were conducted on 1,080 employees from March 2021 to March 2022. There were 192 employees (17.78%) of 40±11 years tested positive for COVID-18, of which 126 cases (16.84%) were HCWs of ≤ 40 years of age, with females dominating. There was no difference between HCW and Non-HCW; ARR=1.08; [95% IK, 0.83-1.43]; p=0.591. Workers on shift work (> 38 hours in a week) were likely to be affected by COVID-19 with RR=1.37; [95% IK, 1.06-1.78]; p=0.018. Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test showed the difference between Shift and Non-shift groups HR=1.43; [95% IK 1.06-1.94]; p=0.019. Asthma or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease appeared as the independent factor of COVID-19 infection with RR=1.82; [95% IK, 1.10-3.02]; p=0.031. CONCLUSION: The probability of contracting COVID-19 was found equal to HCW and Non-HCW. Employees who are on shifts have a greater probability of contracting COVID-19. Survival analysis showed a statistically different Hazard Ratio between shifts with Non-shift workers.

Higher levels of IL-1ra, IL-6, IL-8, MCP-1, MIP-3α, MIP-3ß, and fractalkine are associated with 90-day mortality in 132 non-immunomodulated hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Immune dysregulation with an excessive release of cytokines has been identified as a key driver in the development of severe COVID-19. The aim of this study was to evaluate the initial cytokine profile associated with 90-day mortality and respiratory failure in a cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID 19 that did not receive immunomodulatory therapy. METHODS: Levels of 45 cytokines were measured in blood samples obtained at admission from patients with confirmed COVID-19. Logistic regression analysis was utilized to determine the association between cytokine levels and outcomes. The primary outcome was death within 90 days from admission and the secondary outcome was need for mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: A total of 132 patients were included during the spring of 2020. We found that one anti-inflammatory cytokine, one pro-inflammatory cytokine, and five chemokines were associated with the odds of 90-day mortality, specifically: interleukin-1 receptor antagonist, interleukin-6, interleukin-8, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, macrophage inflammatory protein-3α, macrophage inflammatory protein-3ß, and fractalkine. All but fractalkine were also associated with the odds of respiratory failure during admission. Monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 showed the strongest estimate of association with both outcomes. CONCLUSION: We showed that one anti-inflammatory cytokine, one pro-inflammatory cytokine, and five chemokines were associated with 90-day mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 that did not receive immunomodulatory therapy.

Baricitinib and Pulse Steroids Combination Treatment in Hyperinflammatory COVID-19: A Rheumatological Approach in the Intensive Care Unit.

Hyperinflammatory Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and rapidly-progressive interstitial lung diseases (RP-ILD) secondary to inflammatory myopathies (IIM) present important similarities. These data support the use of anti-rheumatic drugs for the treatment of COVID-19. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of combining baricitinib and pulse steroids with the Standard of Care (SoC) for the treatment of critically ill COVID-19 patients. We retrospectively enrolled consecutive patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) with COVID-19-pneumonia. Patients treated with SoC (dexamethasone plus remdesivir) were compared to patients treated with baricitinib plus 6-methylprednisolone pulses (Rheuma-group). We enrolled 246 patients: 104/246 in the SoC and 142/246 in the Rheuma-group. All patients presented laboratory findings suggestive of hyperinflammatory response. Sixty-four patients (26.1%) died during ICU hospitalization. The mortality rate in the Rheuma-group was significantly lower than in the SoC-group (15.5 vs. 40.4%, p < 0.001). Compared to the SoC-group, patients in the Rheuma-group presented significantly lower inflammatory biomarker levels after one week of treatment. Higher ferritin levels after one week of treatment were strongly associated with mortality (p < 0.001). In this large real-life COVID-19 cohort, baricitinib and pulse steroids led to a significant reduction in mortality, paralleled by a prompt reduction in inflammatory biomarkers. Our experience supports the similarities between hyperinflammatory COVID-19 and the IIM-associated RP-ILD.

Effectiveness of post-COVID-19 primary care attendance in improving survival in very old patients with multimorbidity: a territory-wide target trial emulation.

OBJECTIVES: Older individuals with multimorbidity are at an elevated risk of infection and complications from COVID-19. Effectiveness of post-COVID-19 interventions or care models in reducing subsequent adverse outcomes in these individuals have rarely been examined. This study aims to examine the effectiveness of attending general outpatient within 30 days after discharge from COVID-19 on 1-year survival among older adults aged 85 years or above with multimorbidity. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study emulating a randomised target trial using electronic health records. SETTING: We used data from the Hospital Authority and the Department of Health in Hong Kong, which provided comprehensive electronic health records, COVID-19 confirmed case data, population-based vaccination records and other individual characteristics for the study. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 85 years or above with multimorbidity who were discharged after hospitalisation for COVID-19 between January 2020 and August 2022. INTERVENTIONS: Attending a general outpatient within 30 days of last COVID-19 discharge defined the exposure, compared to no outpatient visit. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was all-cause mortality within one year. Secondary outcomes included mortality from respiratory, cardiovascular and cancer causes. RESULTS: A total of 6183 eligible COVID-19 survivors were included in the analysis. The all-cause mortality rate following COVID-19 hospitalisation was lower in the general outpatient visit group (17.1 deaths per 100 person-year) compared with non-visit group (42.8 deaths per 100 person-year). After adjustment, primary care consultations within 30 days after discharge were associated with a significantly greater 1-year survival (difference in 1-year survival: 11.2%, 95% CI 8.1% to 14.4%). We also observed significantly better survival from respiratory diseases in the general outpatient visit group (difference in 1-year survival: 6.3%, 95% CI 3.5% to 8.9%). In a sensitivity analysis for different grace period lengths, we found that the earlier participants had a general outpatient visit after COVID-19 discharge, the better the survival. CONCLUSIONS: Timely primary care consultations after COVID-19 hospitalisation may improve survival following COVID-19 hospitalisation among older adults aged 85 or above with multimorbidity. Expanding primary care services and implementing follow-up mechanisms are crucial to support this vulnerable population's recovery and well-being.

Effect of disease activity on the clinical outcome of SARS CoV-2 in patients with underlying rheumatic diseases; data from global rheumatology alliance.

Objectives: To determine the effect of disease activity on clinical outcomes of coronavirus disease-2019 in patients with rheumatic diseases. METHODS: The prospective, cohort study was conducted from January 1st to June 30th, 2021, at Rheumatology department, Fauji Foundation Hospital, Rawalpindi. It comprised patients of rheumatic disorders who were affected by coronavirus disease-2019. The patients were categorised according to rheumatic disease activity into remission group I, low disease activity group II, moderate group III and high-activity group IV. Coronavirus disease-2019 outcomes compared included recovered vs death, hospitalisation yes vs no, mechanical ventilation yes vs no. The association of disease activity status with coronavirus disease-2019 outcomes was explored. Data was analysed using SPSS 23. RESULTS: Of the 100 patients, 78(78%) were females and 22(22%) were males. The overall mean age was 45.60±13.7 years. There were 23(23%) patients in group I, 42(42%) patients in group II, 21(21%) patients in group III and 14(14%) patients in group IV. Overall,17(17%) patients died and 83(83%) patients survived. In group III, 7(33.3%) patients died, followed by 6(42.9%) in group IV (p<0.05). In total, 7(7%) patients needed mechanical ventilation, with 3(21.4%) being in group IV (p<0.05). Hospitalisation was needed in 33(33%) cases, and intergroup comparison was non-significant (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe rheumatic autoimmune disease affected by coronavirus disease-2019 were more likely to die and require invasive ventilation.

A multicenter study of asymmetric and symmetric dimethylarginine as predictors of mortality risk in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Mortality of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 has remained high during the consecutive SARS-CoV-2 pandemic waves. Early discrimination of patients at high mortality risk is crucial for optimal patient care. Symmetric (SDMA) and asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA) have been proposed as possible biomarkers to improve risk prediction of COVID-19 patients. We measured SDMA, ADMA, and other L-arginine-related metabolites in 180 patients admitted with COVID-19 in four German university hospitals as compared to 127 healthy controls. Patients were treated according to accepted clinical guidelines and followed-up until death or hospital discharge. Classical inflammatory markers (leukocytes, CRP, PCT), renal function (eGFR), and clinical scores (SOFA) were taken from hospital records. In a small subgroup of 23 COVID-19 patients, sequential blood samples were available and analyzed for biomarker trends over time until 14 days after admission. Patients had significantly elevated SDMA, ADMA, and L-ornithine and lower L-citrulline concentrations than controls. Within COVID-19 patients, SDMA and ADMA were significantly higher in non-survivors (n = 41, 22.8%) than in survivors. In ROC analysis, the optimal cut-off to discriminate non-survivors from survivors was 0.579 µmol/L for SDMA and 0.599 µmol/L for ADMA (both p < 0.001). High SDMA and ADMA were associated with odds ratios for death of 11.45 (3.37-38.87) and 5.95 (2.63-13.45), respectively. Analysis of SDMA and ADMA allowed discrimination of a high-risk (mortality, 43.7%), medium-risk (15.1%), and low-risk group (3.6%); risk prediction was significantly improved over classical laboratory markers. We conclude that analysis of ADMA and SDMA after hospital admission significantly improves risk prediction in COVID-19.

COVID-19 pandemic effects on neonatal inpatient admissions and mortality: interrupted time series analysis of facilities implementing NEST360 in Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, and Tanzania.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of COVID-19 precipitated containment policies (e.g., lockdowns, school closures, etc.). These policies disrupted healthcare, potentially eroding gains for Sustainable Development Goals including for neonatal mortality. Our analysis aimed to evaluate indirect effects of COVID-19 containment policies on neonatal admissions and mortality in 67 neonatal units across Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, and Tanzania between January 2019 and December 2021. METHODS: The Oxford Stringency Index was applied to quantify COVID-19 policy stringency over time for Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, and Tanzania. Stringency increased markedly between March and April 2020 for these four countries (although less so in Tanzania), therefore defining the point of interruption. We used March as the primary interruption month, with April for sensitivity analysis. Additional sensitivity analysis excluded data for March and April 2020, modelled the index as a continuous exposure, and examined models for each country. To evaluate changes in neonatal admissions and mortality based on this interruption period, a mixed effects segmented regression was applied. The unit of analysis was the neonatal unit (n = 67), with a total of 266,741 neonatal admissions (January 2019 to December 2021). RESULTS: Admission to neonatal units decreased by 15% overall from February to March 2020, with half of the 67 neonatal units showing a decline in admissions. Of the 34 neonatal units with a decline in admissions, 19 (28%) had a significant decrease of ≥ 20%. The month-to-month decrease in admissions was approximately 2% on average from March 2020 to December 2021. Despite the decline in admissions, we found no significant changes in overall inpatient neonatal mortality. The three sensitivity analyses provided consistent findings. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 containment measures had an impact on neonatal admissions, but no significant change in overall inpatient neonatal mortality was detected. Additional qualitative research in these facilities has explored possible reasons. Strengthening healthcare systems to endure unexpected events, such as pandemics, is critical in continuing progress towards achieving Sustainable Development Goals, including reducing neonatal deaths to less than 12 per 1000 live births by 2030.

Demographic changes in COVID-19 mortality during the pandemic: analysis of trends in disparities among workers using California's mortality surveillance system.

BACKGROUND: There is limited information on the extent and patterns of disparities in COVID-19 mortality throughout the pandemic. We aimed to examine trends in disparities by demographics over variants in the pre- and post-vaccine availability period among Californian workers using a social determinants of health lens. METHODS: Using death certificates, we identified all COVID-19 deaths that occurred between January 2020 and May 2022 among workers aged 18-64 years in California (CA). We derived estimates for at-risk worker populations using the Current Population Survey. The waves of COVID-19 mortality in the pre-vaccine availability period were March 2020-June 2020 (wave 1), and July 2020-November 2020 (wave 2), and in the post-vaccine availability period: December 2020-May 2021 (wave 3), June 2021-January 2022 (wave 4), and February 2022-May 2022 (wave 5). Poisson regression models with robust standard errors were used to determine wave-specific mortality rate ratios (MRRs). We examined the change in MRR across waves by including an interaction term between each demographic characteristic and wave period in different models. The role of potential misclassification of Race/ethnicity on death certificates was examined using probabilistic quantitative bias analysis as sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Among the 24.1 million working age CA population included in the study, there were 26,068 COVID-19 deaths in the period between January 2020 and May 2022. Compared with their respective reference groups, workers who were 50-64 years old, male, Native Hawaiian, Latino, or African American, foreign-born; individuals who had lower education; and unmarried were disproportionately affected by COVID-19 mortality. While disparities by sex, race/ethnicity and foreign-born status narrowed in later waves (post-vaccine availability), disparities by age, education level and marital status did not change substantially across waves. CONCLUSION: Demographic disparities in COVID-19 mortality narrowed in the post-vaccine availability waves. However, the existence of disparities across all waves of the pandemic, even in an era of widespread vaccine coverage, could indicate remaining gaps in prevention and differential vulnerability. Addressing the underlying social, structural, and occupational factors that contribute to these disparities is critical for achieving health equity.

Evolution of an epidemic: Understanding the opioid epidemic in the United States and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on opioid-related mortality.

We conduct this research with a two-fold aim: providing a quantitative analysis of the opioid epidemic in the United States (U.S.), and exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on opioid-related mortality. The duration and persistence of the opioid epidemic lends itself to the need for an overarching analysis with extensive scope. Additionally, studying the ramifications of these concurrent severe public health crises is vital for informing policies to avoid preventable mortality. Using data from CDC WONDER, we consider opioid-related deaths grouped by Census Region spanning January 1999 to October 2022 inclusive, and later add on a demographic component with gender-stratification. Through the lens of key events in the opioid epidemic, we build an interrupted time series model to reveal statistically significant drivers of opioid-related mortality. We then employ a counterfactual to approximate trends in the absence of COVID-19, and estimate excess opioid-related deaths (defined as observed opioid-related deaths minus projected opioid-related deaths) associated with the pandemic. According to our model, the proliferation of fentanyl contributed to sustained increases in opioid-related death rates across three of the four U.S. census regions, corroborating existing knowledge in the field. Critically, each region has an immediate increase to its opioid-related monthly death rate of at least 0.31 deaths per 100,000 persons at the start of the pandemic, highlighting the nationwide knock-on effects of COVID-19. There are consistent positive deviations from the expected monthly opioid-related death rate and a sizable burden from cumulative excess opioid-related deaths, surpassing 60,000 additional deaths nationally from March 2020 to October 2022, ∼70% of which were male. These results suggest that robust, multi-faceted measures are even more important in light of the COVID-19 pandemic to prevent overdoses and educate users on the risks associated with potent synthetic opioids such as fentanyl.

The differential impacts of COVID-19 mortality on mental health by residential geographic regions: The Los Angeles Pandemic Surveillance Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study examines the association between changes in mental health before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and COVID-19 mortality across geographic areas and by race/ethnicity. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in Los Angeles County between April and May 2021. The study used the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 to assess major depression risk. Participants' home ZIP codes were classified into low, middle, and high COVID-19 mortality impacted areas (CMIA). RESULTS: While there were existing mental health disparities due to differences in demographics and social determinants of health across CMIA in 2018, the pandemic exacerbated the disparities, especially for residents living in high CMIA. Non-White residents in high CMIA reported the largest deterioration in mental health. Differences in mental health by CMIA persisted after controlling for resident characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Living in an area with higher COVID-19 mortality rates may have been associated with worse mental health, with Non-White residents reporting worse mental health outcomes in the high mortality area. POLICY IMPLICATIONS: It is crucial to advocate for greater mental health resources in high COVID-19 mortality areas especially for racial/ethnic minorities.

Clinical, epidemiological characteristics and mortality of pregnant and postpartum women associated with COVID-19 in Brazil: cohort study.

Objective: To analyze the death of Brazilian pregnant and postpartum women due to COVID-19 or unspecific cause. Methods: This is retrospective, descriptive-exploratory, population-based study carried out with the Sistema de Informação de Vigilância Epidemiológica da Gripe (SIVEP-Gripe) database, with pregnant and postpartum women of reproductive age who died from confirmed COVID-19 between 2020 and 2021. The chosen variables were: age, gestational period, type and number of comorbidities, skin color, using the statistical software R Foundation for Statistical Computing Platform, version 4.0.3 and Statistical Package for Social Science, version 29.0 for analysis. Results: A total of 19,333 cases of pregnant and postpartum women aged between 10 and 55 years diagnosed with SARS were identified, whether due to confirmed COVID-19 or unspecific causes. Of these, 1,279 died, these cases were classified into two groups according to the cause of death: deaths from COVID-19 (n= 1,026) and deaths from SARS of unspecific cause (n= 253). Conclusion: The risk of death increased among black and brown women, in the postpartum period and with the presence of comorbidities, mainly diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and obesity. The data presented here draw attention to the number of deaths from SARS, especially among sociodemographic profiles, precarious access to health, such as the black population. In addition, limitations in adequate access to health care are reinforced by even lower rates of ICU admissions among women who died from SARS of an unspecified cause.

Efficacy and Safety of Azvudine in Patients With COVID-19 in China: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies.

BACKGROUND: Azvudine (FNC) is a novel small molecule antiviral drug for treating COVID-19 that is available only on the Chinese market. Despite being recommended for treating COVID-19 by the Chinese guidelines, its efficacy and safety are still unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the protective effect of FNC on COVID-19 outcomes and its safety. METHODS: We followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines and searched the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases to evaluate studies on the effectiveness of FNC in treating COVID-19 in China, focusing on mortality and overall outcomes. Additionally, its impact on the length of hospital stay (LOHS), time to first nucleic acid negative conversion (T-FNANC), and adverse events was evaluated. The inclusion criterion was that the studies were published from July 2021 to April 10, 2024. This study uses the ROBINS-I tool to assess bias risk and employs the GRADE approach to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: The meta-analysis included 24 retrospective studies involving a total of 11 830 patients. Low-certainty evidence revealed no significant difference in mortality (OR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.76-1.08) or LOHS (WMD = -0.24, 95% CI: -0.83 to 0.35) between FNC and Paxlovid in COVID-19 patients. Low-certainty evidence shows that the T-FNANC was longer (WMD = 1.95, 95% CI: 0.36-3.53). Compared with the Paxlovid group, low-certainty evidence shows the FNC group exhibited a worse composite outcome (OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.63-0.95) and fewer adverse events (OR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.46-0.85). Compared with supportive treatment, low certainty shows FNC significantly reduced the mortality rate in COVID-19 patients (OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.51-0.74) and decreased the composite outcome (OR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.50-0.91), and very low certainty evidence shows significantly decreased the T-FNANC (WMD = -4.62, 95% CI: -8.08 to -1.15). However, in very low certainty, there was no significant difference in LOHS (WMD = -0.70, 95% CI: -3.32 to 1.91) or adverse events (OR = 1.97, 95% CI: 0.48-8.17). CONCLUSIONS: FNC appears to be a safe and potentially effective treatment for COVID-19 in China, but further research with larger, high-quality studies is necessary to confirm these findings. Due to the certainty of the evidence and the specific context of the studies conducted in China, caution should be exercised when considering whether the results are applicable worldwide. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO number: CRD42024520565.

Efficacy and safety of glucocorticoids in the treatment of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs.

In the realm of acute respiratory infections, coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), poses a global public health challenge. The application of corticosteroids (CSs) in COVID-19 remains a contentious topic among researchers. Accordingly, our team performed a comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to meticulously evaluate the safety and efficacy of CSs in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. To explore efficacy of CSs in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, we meticulously screened RCTs across key databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, as well as China's CNKI and Wanfang Data. We focused on assessing the 28 days mortality rates. We evaluated the data heterogeneity using the Chi-square test and I2 values, setting significance at 0.1 and 50%. Data from 21 RCTs involving 5721 participants were analyzed. The analysis did not demonstrate a significant association between CSs intervention and the 28 days mortality risk in hospitalized COVID-19 patients (relative risk [RR] = 0.93; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.84-1.03; P = 0.15). However, subgroup analysis revealed a significant reduction in 28 days mortality among patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 (RR at 0.85; 95% CI: 0.76-0.95; P = 0.004). Specifically, short-term CS administration (≤ 3 days) was associated with a substantial improvement in clinical outcomes (RR = 0.24; 95% CI: 0.09-0.63; P = 0.004), as was longer-term use (≥ 8 days) (RR = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.77-0.99; P = 0.04). Additionally, in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19, the administration of dexamethasone increased the number of 28 days ventilator-free days (Mean Difference = 1.92; 95% CI: 0.44-3.40; P = 0.01). Methylprednisolone also demonstrated significant benefits in improving clinical outcomes (RR = 0.24; 95% CI: 0.09-0.63; P = 0.004). Our meta-analysis demonstrated that although there is no significant difference in 28 days mortality rates among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, the use of CSs may be beneficial in improving clinical outcomes in moderate or severe COVID-19 patients. There was no significant increase in the occurrence of adverse events associated with the use of CSs. Our meta-analysis provides evidence that while CSs may not be suitable for all COVID-19 patients, they could be effective and safe in severely ill COVID-19 patients. Consequently, it is recommended to administer CSs for personalized treatments in COVID-19 cases to improve the clinical outcomes while minimizing adverse events.

Periodic Fasting and Acute Cardiac Events in Patients Evaluated for COVID-19: An Observational Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Periodic fasting was previously associated with greater longevity and a lower incidence of heart failure (HF) in a pre-pandemic population. In patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), periodic fasting was associated with a lower risk of death or hospitalization. This study evaluated the association between periodic fasting and HF hospitalization and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). METHODS: Patients enrolled in the INSPIRE registry from February 2013 to March 2020 provided periodic fasting information and were followed into the pandemic (n = 5227). Between March 2020 and February 2023, N = 2373 patients were studied, with n = 601 COVID-positive patients being the primary study population (2836 had no COVID-19 test; 18 were excluded due to fasting <5 years). A Cox regression was used to evaluate HF admissions, MACEs, and other endpoints through March 2023, adjusting for covariables, including time-varying COVID-19 vaccination. RESULTS: In patients positive for COVID-19, periodic fasting was reported by 180 (30.0% of 601), who periodically fasted over 43.1 ± 19.2 years (min: 7, max: 83). HF hospitalization (n = 117, 19.5%) occurred in 13.3% of fasters and 22.1% of non-fasters [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.63, CI = 0.40, 0.99; p = 0.044]. Most HF admissions were exacerbations, with a prior HF diagnosis in 111 (94.9%) patients hospitalized for HF. Fasting was also associated with a lower MACE risk (aHR = 0.64, CI = 0.43, 0.96; p = 0.030). In n = 1772 COVID-negative patients (29.7% fasters), fasting was not associated with HF hospitalization (aHR = 0.82, CI = 0.64, 1.05; p = 0.12). In COVID-positive and negative patients combined, periodic fasting was associated with lower mortality (aHR = 0.60, CI = 0.39, 0.93; p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Routine periodic fasting was associated with less HF hospitalization in patients positive for COVID-19.

Effect of noninvasive ventilation on mortality and clinical outcomes among patients with severe hypoxemic COVID-19 pneumonia after high-flow nasal oxygen failure: a multicenter retrospective French cohort with propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the effect of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) on mortality and length of stay after high flow nasal oxygenation (HFNO) failure among patients with severe hypoxemic COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: In this multicenter, retrospective study, we enrolled COVID-19 patients admitted in intensive care unit (ICU) for severe COVID-19 pneumonia with a HFNO failure from December 2020 to January 2022. The primary outcome was to compare the 90-day mortality between patients who required a straight intubation after HFNO failure and patients who received NIV after HFNO failure. Secondary outcomes included ICU and hospital length of stay. A propensity score analysis was performed to control for confounding factors between groups. Exploratory outcomes included a subgroup analysis for 90-day mortality. RESULTS: We included 461 patients with HFNO failure in the analysis, 233 patients in the straight intubation group and 228 in the NIV group. The 90-day mortality did not significantly differ between groups, 58/228 (25.4%) int the NIV group compared with 59/233 (25.3%) in the straight intubation group, with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) after propensity score weighting of 0.82 [95%CI, 0.50-1.35] (p = 0.434). ICU length of stay was significantly shorter in the NIV group compared to the straight intubation group, 10.0 days [IQR, 7.0-19.8] versus 18.0 days [IQR,11.0-31.0] with a propensity score weighted HR of 1.77 [95%CI, 1.29-2.43] (p < 0.001). A subgroup analysis showed a significant increase in mortality rate for intubated patients in the NIV group with 56/122 (45.9%), compared to 59/233 (25.3%) for patients in the straight intubation group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In severely hypoxemic COVID-19 patients, no significant differences were observed on 90-day mortality between patients receiving straight intubation and those receiving NIV after HFNO failure. NIV strategy was associated with a significant reduction in ICU length of stay, despite an increase in mortality in the subgroup of patients finally intubated.

High-income ZIP codes in New York City demonstrate higher case rates during off-peak COVID-19 waves.

Introduction: Our study explores how New York City (NYC) communities of various socioeconomic strata were uniquely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: New York City ZIP codes were stratified into three bins by median income: high-income, middle-income, and low-income. Case, hospitalization, and death rates obtained from NYCHealth were compared for the period between March 2020 and April 2022. Results: COVID-19 transmission rates among high-income populations during off-peak waves were higher than transmission rates among low-income populations. Hospitalization rates among low-income populations were higher during off-peak waves despite a lower transmission rate. Death rates during both off-peak and peak waves were higher for low-income ZIP codes. Discussion: This study presents evidence that while high-income areas had higher transmission rates during off-peak periods, low-income areas suffered greater adverse outcomes in terms of hospitalization and death rates. The importance of this study is that it focuses on the social inequalities that were amplified by the pandemic.

Patient self-inflicted lung injury associated pneumothorax/pneumomediastinum is a risk factor for worse outcomes of severe COVID-19: a case-control study.

We aimed to determine the clinical characteristics of patient self-inflicted lung injury (P-SILI)-associated pneumothorax/pneumomediastinum, to reveal its risk factors, and to assess its impact on severe COVID-19 cases. In total, 229 patients were included in this case-control study. They were randomly divided into either the case group or the control group as per the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The two groups were further analyzed to reveal the risk factors of spontaneous pneumothorax/pneumomediastinum (SP/P). Finally, risk factors for death were analyzed in the case group and the relationship between death and SP/P was also analyzed among all patients. The mean age of patients was 59.69 ± 17.01 years, most of them were male (74.2%), and 62.0% of them had comorbidities upon admission. A respiratory rate higher than 30 BPM was a risk factor for SP/P (OR 7.186, 95% CI 2.414-21.391, P < 0.001). Patients with delayed intubation due to early application of HFNC or NIV had a higher mortality rate when they developed SP/P (P < 0.05). Additionally, advanced age increased the risk of death (P < 0.05). Finally, SP/P may be a risk factor for death among patients with severe COVID-19 (OR 2.047). P-SILI occurs in severe COVID-19 with acute respiratory failure. It is necessary to identify the risk factors of P-SILI, the indicators of severe P-SILI, and the preventive measures.

Sarcopenia, sarcopenic obesity and the clinical outcome of the older inpatients with COVID-19 infection: a prospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the impact of sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity (SO) on the clinical outcome in older patients with COVID-19 infection and chronic disease. METHODS: We prospectively collected data from patients admitted to Huadong Hospital for COVID-19 infection between November 1, 2022, and January 31, 2023. These patients were included from a previously established comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) cohort. We collected information on their pre-admission condition regarding sarcopenia, SO, and malnutrition, as well as their medical treatment. The primary endpoint was the incidence of intubation, while secondary endpoints included in-hospital mortality rates. We then utilized Kaplan-Meier (K-M) survival curves and the log-rank tests to compare the clinical outcomes related to intubation or death, assessing the impact of sarcopenia and SO on patient clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 113 patients (age 89.6 ± 7.0 years) were included in the study. Among them, 51 patients had sarcopenia and 39 had SO prior to hospitalization. Intubation was required for 6 patients without sarcopenia (9.7%) and for 18 sarcopenia patients (35.3%), with 16 of these being SO patients (41%). Mortality occurred in 2 patients without sarcopenia (3.3%) and in 13 sarcopenia patients (25.5%), of which 11 were SO patients (28%). Upon further analysis, patients with SO exhibited significantly elevated risks for both intubation (Hazard Ratio [HR] 7.43, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.26-43.90, P < 0.001) and mortality (HR 6.54, 95% CI 1.09-39.38, P < 0.001) after adjusting for confounding factors. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of sarcopenia or SO was high among senior inpatients, and both conditions were found to have a significant negative impact on the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 infection. Therefore, it is essential to regularly assess and intervene in these conditions at the earliest stage possible.