What happened to the patients? Care trajectories for persons with a delayed hospital discharge during wave 1 of COVID-19 in Ontario, Canada; a population-based retrospective cohort study.

During the initial wave of coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19), patients were rapidly discharged from acute hospitals in anticipation of an expected influx of patients with COVID-19. Patients that were no longer receiving acute medical care but were waiting for their next destination (i.e., delayed hospital discharge) were particularly affected. The objectives of this study were to examine the impact of COVID-19 onset on healthcare utilization and mortality among those who experienced delayed discharge from acute care. We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study using linked administrative data. We included persons discharged from acute care who experienced a delayed hospital stay between April 1, 2019 and September 30, 2020. The onset of COVID-19 was the exposure (March 1, 2020), while the period of April 1, 2019 to February 29, 2020 was considered as a comparator. Primary outcomes included healthcare utilization and mortality following discharge, stratified by care setting (homecare, inpatient rehabilitation or long-term care). Multivariable logistic, zero-inflated Poisson regressions, and Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine the impact of COVID-19 on outcomes while adjusting for covariates. Those discharged home were more likely to receive homecare and physician visits within 30 days during COVID-19. The type of visits examined included both in-person as well as virtual visits. Individuals discharged to inpatient rehabilitation experienced lower rates of general physician visits but higher rates of specialist and homecare visits. Patients discharged to long-term care were significantly less likely to receive a physician visit following COVID-19, and significantly more likely to be readmitted within 7-days. There were no significant differences in mortality irrespective of discharge destination during the two time periods. Overall, the onset of the initial wave of COVID-19 significantly impacted healthcare utilization among those with a delayed discharge but varied depending on destination, with those in long-term care being most impacted.

Is elevated ALT associated with lifestyle risk factors? A population-based survey.

Purpose: Given the high prevalence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and the role of Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) in diagnosing liver injury along with the increasing prevalence of lifestyle risk factors, we aimed to evaluate the association between serum ALT level and lifestyle risk factors in a population-based survey. Methods: This was a population-based study conducted in rural and urban areas of Iran in 2016. Cluster sampling method was applied to enroll a total of 31,050 participants aged ≥ 18. Demographic data, anthropometric measures, and laboratory samples were gathered. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed using three different cut-off levels for elevated ALT to assess the relationship between elevated ALT and lifestyle risk factors. Results: The prevalence of elevated ALT was significantly higher in men with elevated body mass index (BMI), waist-to-hip ratio (WTH), hip circumference, and salt consumption, likewise, in women with higher BMI and WTH. In the multivariate logistic model adjusted for age and sex, high WTH (adjusted odds ratio: 1.73; 95% CI 1.52-1.96), BMI > 25 (1.51; 95% CI 1.29-1.76), hip circumference (1.26; 95% CI 1-1.58), and current smoking (0.67; 95% CI 0.56-0.8) were associated with elevated ALT levels using American cut-off (ALT > 33U/L for male and ALT > 25U/L for female). Only physical measurements (BMI, WTH) but not lifestyle risk factors were related to the increased ALT regardless of the selected cut-offs. Conclusion: As elevated ALT was associated with several lifestyle risk factors, stewardship programs should be established to modify lifestyle risk factors, such as abdominal obesity and physical inactivity. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40200-022-01137-6.

Primary-level worker interventions for the care of people living with mental disorders and distress in low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Community-based primary-level workers (PWs) are an important strategy for addressing gaps in mental health service delivery in low- and middle-income countries.  OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of PW-led treatments for persons with mental health symptoms in LMICs, compared to usual care.  SEARCH METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, ICTRP, reference lists (to 20 June 2019).   SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of PW-led or collaborative-care interventions treating people with mental health symptoms or their carers in LMICs.  PWs included: primary health professionals (PHPs), lay health workers (LHWs), community non-health professionals (CPs).  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Seven conditions were identified apriori and analysed by disorder and PW examining recovery, prevalence, symptom change, quality-of-life (QOL), functioning, service use (SU), and adverse events (AEs).  Risk ratios (RRs) were used for dichotomous outcomes; mean difference (MDs), standardised mean differences (SMDs), or mean change differences (MCDs) for continuous outcomes.  For SMDs, 0.20 to 0.49 represented small, 0.50 to 0.79 moderate, and ≥0.80 large clinical effects.  Analysis timepoints: T1 (<1 month), T2 (1-6 months), T3 ( >6 months) post-intervention.  MAIN RESULTS: Description of studies 95 trials (72 new since 2013) from 30 LMICs (25 trials from 13 LICs).  Risk of bias Most common: detection bias, attrition bias (efficacy), insufficient protection against contamination.  Intervention effects *Unless indicated, comparisons were usual care at T2.  "Probably", "may", or "uncertain" indicates "moderate", "low," or "very low" certainty evidence.   Adults with common mental disorders (CMDs) LHW-led interventions a. may increase recovery (2 trials, 308 participants; RR 1.29, 95%CI 1.06 to 1.56); b. may reduce prevalence (2 trials, 479 participants; RR 0.42, 95%CI 0.18 to 0.96); c. may reduce symptoms (4 trials, 798 participants; SMD -0.59, 95%CI -1.01 to -0.16); d. may improve QOL (1 trial, 521 participants; SMD 0.51, 95%CI 0.34 to 0.69); e. may slightly reduce functional impairment (3 trials, 1399 participants; SMD -0.47, 95%CI -0.8 to -0.15); f. may reduce AEs (risk of suicide ideation/attempts); g. may have uncertain effects on SU. Collaborative-care a. may increase recovery (5 trials, 804 participants; RR 2.26, 95%CI 1.50 to 3.43); b. may reduce prevalence although the actual effect range indicates it may have little-or-no effect (2 trials, 2820 participants; RR 0.57, 95%CI 0.32 to 1.01); c. may slightly reduce symptoms (6 trials, 4419 participants; SMD -0.35, 95%CI -0.63 to -0.08); d. may slightly improve QOL (6 trials, 2199 participants; SMD 0.34, 95%CI 0.16 to 0.53); e. probably has little-to-no effect on functional impairment (5 trials, 4216 participants; SMD -0.13, 95%CI -0.28 to 0.03); f. may reduce SU (referral to MH specialists);  g. may have uncertain effects on AEs (death). Women with perinatal depression (PND) LHW-led interventions a. may increase recovery (4 trials, 1243 participants; RR 1.29, 95%CI 1.08 to 1.54); b. probably slightly reduce symptoms (5 trials, 1989 participants; SMD -0.26, 95%CI -0.37 to -0.14); c. may slightly reduce functional impairment (4 trials, 1856 participants; SMD -0.23, 95%CI -0.41 to -0.04); d. may have little-to-no effect on AEs (death);  e. may have uncertain effects on SU. Collaborative-care a. has uncertain effects on symptoms/QOL/SU/AEs. Adults with post-traumatic stress (PTS) or CMDs in humanitarian settings LHW-led interventions a. may slightly reduce depression symptoms (5 trials, 1986 participants; SMD -0.36, 95%CI -0.56 to -0.15); b. probably slightly improve QOL (4 trials, 1918 participants; SMD -0.27, 95%CI -0.39 to -0.15); c. may have uncertain effects on symptoms (PTS)/functioning/SU/AEs. PHP-led interventions a. may reduce PTS symptom prevalence (1 trial, 313 participants; RR 5.50, 95%CI 2.50 to 12.10) and depression prevalence (1 trial, 313 participants; RR 4.60, 95%CI 2.10 to 10.08);  b. may have uncertain effects on symptoms/functioning/SU/AEs.   Adults with harmful/hazardous alcohol or substance use LHW-led interventions a. may increase recovery from harmful/hazardous alcohol use although the actual effect range indicates it may have little-or-no effect (4 trials, 872 participants; RR 1.28, 95%CI 0.94 to 1.74); b. may have little-to-no effect on the prevalence of methamphetamine use (1 trial, 882 participants; RR 1.01, 95%CI 0.91 to 1.13) and  functional impairment (2 trials, 498 participants; SMD -0.14, 95%CI -0.32 to 0.03); c. probably slightly reduce risk of harmful/hazardous alcohol use (3 trials, 667 participants; SMD -0.22, 95%CI -0.32 to -0.11);  d. may have uncertain effects on SU/AEs. PHP/CP-led interventions a. probably have little-to-no effect on recovery from harmful/hazardous alcohol use (3 trials, 1075 participants; RR 0.93, 95%CI 0.77 to 1.12) or QOL (1 trial, 560 participants; MD 0.00, 95%CI -0.10 to 0.10); b. probably slightly reduce risk of harmful/hazardous alcohol and substance use (2 trials, 705 participants; SMD -0.20, 95%CI -0.35 to -0.05; moderate-certainty evidence); c. may have uncertain effects on prevalence (cannabis use)/SU/AEs. PW-led interventions for alcohol/substance dependence a. may have uncertain effects.  Adults with severe mental disorders *Comparisons were specialist-led care at T1. LHW-led interventions a. may have little-to-no effect on caregiver burden (1 trial, 253 participants; MD -0.04, 95%CI -0.18 to 0.11);  b. may have uncertain effects on symptoms/functioning/SU/AEs.  PHP-led or collaborative-care a. may reduce functional impairment (7 trials, 874 participants; SMD -1.13, 95%CI -1.78 to -0.47); b. may have uncertain effects on recovery/relapse/symptoms/QOL/SU.  Adults with dementia and carers PHP/LHW-led carer interventions a. may have little-to-no effect on the severity of behavioural symptoms in dementia patients (2 trials, 134 participants; SMD -0.26, 95%CI -0.60 to 0.08); b. may reduce carers' mental distress (2 trials, 134 participants; SMD -0.47, 95%CI -0.82 to -0.13);  c. may have uncertain effects on QOL/functioning/SU/AEs. Children with PTS or CMDs LHW-led interventions a. may have little-to-no effect on PTS symptoms (3 trials, 1090 participants; MCD -1.34, 95%CI -2.83 to 0.14); b. probably have little-to-no effect on depression symptoms (3 trials, 1092 participants; MCD -0.61, 95%CI -1.23 to 0.02) or on functional impairment (3 trials, 1092 participants; MCD -0.81, 95%CI -1.48 to -0.13);  c. may have little-or-no effect on AEs. CP-led interventions a. may have little-to-no effect on depression symptoms (2 trials, 602 participants; SMD -0.19, 95%CI -0.57 to 0.19) or on AEs;  b. may have uncertain effects on recovery/symptoms(PTS)/functioning. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: PW-led interventions show promising benefits in improving outcomes for CMDs, PND, PTS, harmful alcohol/substance use, and dementia carers in LMICs.

Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Psychological Disorder or Poverty? Results of a Large Cross-sectional Study in Iran.

BACKGROUND: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a functional disease with no exact laboratory or imaging findings. IBS is more common in areas with a history of psychological trauma and war. This study aims to report the prevalence and possible determinants of IBS in southwestern Iran, an area with a notable history of war. METHODS: We randomly enrolled 1849 permanent residents in 29 cities aged 20 to 65 years. A validated for Farsi version Rome III criteria and a questionnaire, including demographic data and health history, were administered to each subject. Participants who fulfilled the Rome III criteria were categorized into three groups: Diarrhea dominant (IBS-D), Constipation dominant (IBS-C), and Mixed type (IBS-M). RESULTS: The total prevalence of IBS was 3.2%, with 70% of subjects being of Arab descent (P=0.004). IBS was more common in females, singles, illiterate subjects, and people younger than 30 years; however, none of these differences were statistically significant. People with depression, anxiety, self-report of psychological disorders, and very low socioeconomic status had a significantly higher prevalence of IBS (P<0.05). After multivariable logistic regression analysis, very low socioeconomic status had an independent role in IBS predictivity (OR: 2.28, 95% CI: 1.01-5.15). CONCLUSION: This study shows a higher prevalence of IBS symptoms in a population-based study in the region compared to counterparts in other regions of Iran. Considering the higher prevalence of self-reported psychological disorders, further studies are recommended to focus on the exact diagnosis of mental disorders and their influence on IBS.

Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of 905 COVID-19 Patients Admitted to Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex in the Capital City of Tehran, Iran.

BACKGROUND: We studied the clinical characteristics and outcomes of 905 hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients admitted to Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex (IKHC), Tehran, Iran. METHODS: COVID-19 patients were recruited based on clinical symptoms and patterns of computed tomography (CT) imaging between February 20 and March 19. All patients were tested for the presence of COVID-19 RNA. The Poisson regression model estimated the incidence rate ratio (IRR) for different parameters. RESULTS: The average age (± standard deviation) was 56.9 (±15.7) years and 61.77% were male. The most common symptoms were fever (93.59%), dry cough (79.78%), and dyspnea (75.69%). Only 43.76% of patients were positive for the RT-PCR COVID-19 test. Prevalence of lymphopenia was 42.9% and more than 90% had elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) or C-reactive protein (CRP). About 11% were severe cases, and 13.7% died in the hospital. The median length of stay (LOS) was 3 days. We found higher risks of mortality in patients who were older than 70 years (IRR = 11.77, 95% CI 3.63-38.18), underwent mechanical ventilation (IRR = 7.36, 95% CI 5.06-10.7), were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) (IRR = 5.47, 95% CI 4.00-8.38), tested positive on the COVID-19 test (IRR = 2.80, 95% CI 1.64-3.55), and reported a history of comorbidity (IRR = 1.76, 95% CI 1.07-2.89) compared to their corresponding reference groups. Hydroxychloroquine therapy was not associated with mortality in our study. CONCLUSION: Older age, experiencing a severe form of the disease, and having a comorbidity were the most important prognostic factors for COVID-19 infection. Larger studies are needed to perform further subgroup analyses and verify high-risk groups.