Comprehensive statistical analysis reveals significant benefits of COVID-19 vaccination in hospitalized patients: propensity score, covariate adjustment, and feature importance by permutation.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines effectively prevent infection and hospitalization. However, few population-based studies have compared the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 using advanced statistical methods. Our objective is to address this evidence gap by comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated patients hospitalized for COVID-19. METHODS: This retrospective cohort included adult COVID-19 patients admitted from March 2021 to August 2022 from 27 hospitals. Clinical characteristics, vaccination status, and outcomes were extracted from medical records. Vaccinated and unvaccinated patients were compared using propensity score analyses, calculated based on variables associated with vaccination status and/or outcomes, including waves. The vaccination effect was also assessed by covariate adjustment and feature importance by permutation. RESULTS: From the 3,188 patients, 1,963 (61.6%) were unvaccinated and 1,225 (38.4%) were fully vaccinated. Among these, 558 vaccinated individuals were matched with 558 unvaccinated ones. Vaccinated patients had lower rates of mortality (19.4% vs. 33.3%), invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV-18.3% vs. 34.6%), noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV-10.6% vs. 22.0%), intensive care unit admission (ICU-32.0% vs. 44.1%) vasoactive drug use (21.1% vs. 32.6%), dialysis (8.2% vs. 14.7%) hospital length of stay (7.0 vs. 9.0 days), and thromboembolic events (3.9% vs.7.7%), p < 0.05 for all. Risk-adjusted multivariate analysis demonstrated a significant inverse association between vaccination and in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31-0.56; p < 0.001) as well as IMV (aOR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.30-0.53; p < 0.001). These results were consistent in all analyses, including feature importance by permutation. CONCLUSION: Vaccinated patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 had significantly lower mortality and other severe outcomes than unvaccinated ones during the Delta and Omicron waves. These findings have important implications for public health strategies and support the critical importance of vaccination efforts, particularly in low-income countries, where vaccination coverage remains suboptimal.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients with preexisting dementia: a large multicenter propensity-matched Brazilian cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although dementia has emerged as an important risk factor for severe SARS-CoV-2 infection, results on COVID-19-related complications and mortality are not consistent. We examined the clinical presentations and outcomes of COVID-19 in a multicentre cohort of in-hospital patients, comparing those with and without dementia. METHODS: This retrospective observational study comprises COVID-19 laboratory-confirmed patients aged ≥ 60 years admitted to 38 hospitals from 19 cities in Brazil. Data were obtained from electronic hospital records. A propensity score analysis was used to match patients with and without dementia (up to 3:1) according to age, sex, comorbidities, year, and hospital of admission. Our primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. We also assessed admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), kidney replacement therapy (KRT), sepsis, nosocomial infection, and thromboembolic events. RESULTS: Among 1,556 patients included in the study, 405 (4.5%) had a diagnosis of dementia and 1,151 were matched controls. When compared to matched controls, patients with dementia had a lower frequency of dyspnoea, cough, myalgia, headache, ageusia, and anosmia; and higher frequency of fever and delirium. They also had a lower frequency of ICU admission (32.7% vs. 47.1%, p < 0.001) and shorter ICU length of stay (7 vs. 9 days, p < 0.026), and a lower frequency of sepsis (17% vs. 24%, p = 0.005), KRT (6.4% vs. 13%, p < 0.001), and IVM (4.6% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.002). There were no differences in hospital mortality between groups. CONCLUSION: Clinical manifestations of COVID-19 differ between older inpatients with and without dementia. We observed that dementia alone could not explain the higher short-term mortality following severe COVID-19. Therefore, clinicians should consider other risk factors such as acute morbidity severity and baseline frailty when evaluating the prognosis of older adults with dementia hospitalised with COVID-19.

Patients hospitalized with active tuberculosis and Covid-19 coinfection: A matched case-control from the Brazilian Covid-19 Registry.

Although control of Covid-19 has improved, the virus continues to cause infections, such as tuberculosis, that is still endemic in many countries, representing a scenario of coinfection. To compare Covid-19 clinical manifestations and outcomes between patients with active tuberculosis infection and matched controls. This is a matched case-control study based on data from the Brazilian Covid-19 Registry, in hospitalized patients aged 18 or over with laboratory confirmed Covid-19 from March 1, 2020, to March 31, 2022. Cases were patients with tuberculosis and controls were Covid-19 patients without tuberculosis. From 13,636 Covid-19, 36 also had active tuberculosis (0.0026%). Pulmonary fibrosis (5.6% vs 0.0%), illicit drug abuse (30.6% vs 3.0%), alcoholism (33.3% vs 11.9%) and smoking (50.0% vs 9.7%) were more common among patients with tuberculosis. They also had a higher frequency of nausea and vomiting (25.0% vs 10.4%). There were no significant differences in in-hospital mortality, mechanical ventilation, need for dialysis and ICU stay. Patients with TB infection presented a higher frequency of pulmonary fibrosis, abuse of illicit drugs, alcoholism, current smoking, symptoms of nausea and vomiting. The outcomes were similar between them.

Temporal validation of the MMCD score to predict kidney replacement therapy and in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury has been described as a common complication in patients hospitalized with COVID-19, which may lead to the need for kidney replacement therapy (KRT) in its most severe forms. Our group developed and validated the MMCD score in Brazilian COVID-19 patients to predict KRT, which showed excellent performance using data from 2020. This study aimed to validate the MMCD score in a large cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in a different pandemic phase and assess its performance to predict in-hospital mortality. METHODS: This study is part of the "Brazilian COVID-19 Registry", a retrospective observational cohort of consecutive patients hospitalized for laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in 25 Brazilian hospitals between March 2021 and August 2022. The primary outcome was KRT during hospitalization and the secondary was in-hospital mortality. We also searched literature for other prediction models for KRT, to assess the results in our database. Performance was assessed using area under the receiving operator characteristic curve (AUROC) and the Brier score. RESULTS: A total of 9422 patients were included, 53.8% were men, with a median age of 59 (IQR 48-70) years old. The incidence of KRT was 8.8% and in-hospital mortality was 18.1%. The MMCD score had excellent discrimination and overall performance to predict KRT (AUROC: 0.916 [95% CI 0.909-0.924]; Brier score = 0.057). Despite the excellent discrimination and overall performance (AUROC: 0.922 [95% CI 0.914-0.929]; Brier score = 0.100), the calibration was not satisfactory concerning in-hospital mortality. A random forest model was applied in the database, with inferior performance to predict KRT requirement (AUROC: 0.71 [95% CI 0.69-0.73]). CONCLUSION: The MMCD score is not appropriate for in-hospital mortality but demonstrates an excellent predictive ability to predict KRT in COVID-19 patients. The instrument is low cost, objective, fast and accurate, and can contribute to supporting clinical decisions in the efficient allocation of assistance resources in patients with COVID-19.

Development and validation of the MMCD score to predict kidney replacement therapy in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is frequently associated with COVID-19, and the need for kidney replacement therapy (KRT) is considered an indicator of disease severity. This study aimed to develop a prognostic score for predicting the need for KRT in hospitalised COVID-19 patients, and to assess the incidence of AKI and KRT requirement. METHODS: This study is part of a multicentre cohort, the Brazilian COVID-19 Registry. A total of 5212 adult COVID-19 patients were included between March/2020 and September/2020. Variable selection was performed using generalised additive models (GAM), and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression was used for score derivation. Accuracy was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC). RESULTS: The median age of the model-derivation cohort was 59 (IQR 47-70) years, 54.5% were men, 34.3% required ICU admission, 20.9% evolved with AKI, 9.3% required KRT, and 15.1% died during hospitalisation. The temporal validation cohort had similar age, sex, ICU admission, AKI, required KRT distribution and in-hospital mortality. The geographic validation cohort had similar age and sex; however, this cohort had higher rates of ICU admission, AKI, need for KRT and in-hospital mortality. Four predictors of the need for KRT were identified using GAM: need for mechanical ventilation, male sex, higher creatinine at hospital presentation and diabetes. The MMCD score had excellent discrimination in derivation (AUROC 0.929, 95% CI 0.918-0.939) and validation (temporal AUROC 0.927, 95% CI 0.911-0.941; geographic AUROC 0.819, 95% CI 0.792-0.845) cohorts and good overall performance (Brier score: 0.057, 0.056 and 0.122, respectively). The score is implemented in a freely available online risk calculator ( https://www.mmcdscore.com/ ). CONCLUSIONS: The use of the MMCD score to predict the need for KRT may assist healthcare workers in identifying hospitalised COVID-19 patients who may require more intensive monitoring, and can be useful for resource allocation.

Advances in Value-Based Healthcare by the Application of Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing for Inpatient Management: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: Implementation of value-based initiatives depends on cost-assessment methods that can provide high-quality cost information. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) is increasingly being used to solve the cost-information gap. This study aimed to review the use of the TDABC methodology in real-world settings and to estimate its impact on the value-based healthcare concept for inpatient management. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted by screening PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus databases following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, including all studies up to August 2019. The use of TDABC for inpatient management was the main eligibility criterion. A qualitative approach was used to analyze the different methodological aspects of TDABC and its effective contribution to the implementation of value-based initiatives. RESULTS: A total of 1066 studies were retrieved, and 26 full-text articles were selected for review. Only studies focused on surgical inpatient conditions were identified. Most of the studies reported the types of activities on a macrolevel. Professional and structural cost variables were usually assessed. Eighteen studies reported that TDABC contributed to value-based initiatives, especially cost-saving findings. TDABC was satisfactorily applied to achieve value-based contributions in all the studies that used the method for this purpose. CONCLUSIONS: TDABC could be a strategy for increasing cost accuracy in real-world settings, and the method could help in the transition from fee-for-service to value-based systems. The results could provide a clearer idea of the costs, help with resource allocation and waste reduction, and might support clinicians and managers in increasing value in a more accurate and transparent way.

Two HEmostasis Methods After TransradIal Catheterization: THEMATIC Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the effect of 2 hemostasis devices on the incidence of radial artery occlusion (RAO) after transradial cardiac catheterization. BACKGROUND: Radial artery occlusion is the most prevalent ischemic complication after radial artery catheterization. There is still no predictive pattern of vessel patency assessment, and the comparative effectiveness of different hemostasis techniques has yet to be established. METHODS: This study used a randomized clinical trial of adult patients undergoing transradial cardiac catheterization. Participants were randomized into an intervention group (hemostasis with the TR Band device) and a control group (hemostasis with a conventional pressure dressing). The primary end point was the incidence of RAO (at discharge and at 30 days post catheterization). RESULTS: Among the 600 patients included (301 in the intervention group and 299 controls), immediate RAO occurred in 24 (8%) in the TR Band group and 19 (6%) in the pressure-dressing group; at 30 days, RAO was present in 5 patients (5%) in the TR Band group and 7 (6%) in the pressure-dressing group. On multivariate analysis, peripheral vascular disease was the only independent predictor of RAO at discharge and at 30 days. ConclusionsThe incidence of RAO was similar in patients who received hemostasis with a TR Band versus a pressure dressing after transradial cardiac catheterization.

Quality Measures in Heart Failure: the Past, the Present, and the Future.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This paper reviews performance measure in health, their importance, and methodologic issues, focusing on metrics for health failure patients. Quality measures are instruments to assess structural aspects or processes of care aiming to guarantee that optimal patient outcomes are achieved. As heart failure is a chronic condition in which established therapies reduce mortality and hospital admissions, there are quite a lot of initiatives that aim to monitor for quality of care and to coordinate the disease management. RECENT FINDINGS: Several performance measures were validated for these patients, from process of care (left ventricular function assessment and use of ACEi/ARBs and beta-blockers) to health outcomes (hospital mortality and readmissions). In the early years, studies demonstrated a relationship between quality measurements and health outcomes. Nonetheless, more recent ones based on large databases of patients' medical records have shown that traditional indicators explain only a small fraction of health and patient reported- and perceived outcomes. Public reporting of quality measures and payment conditioned to the quality of care provided were not able to show benefit in terms of hard outcomes. Data science and big data methods are promising in providing actionable knowledge for quality improvement, with real-time data that could support decision-making. Heart failure is a chronic condition that has proven to be useful for measuring medical and healthcare quality. Evidence-based indicators have already reached high rates of adherence and are currently poorly correlated with outcomes. Using real-life data and based on the patient's perspective can be useful tools to improve these indicators.

Utility index and vision-related quality of life in patients awaiting specialist eye care.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to ascertain utility and vision-related quality of life in patients awaiting access to specialist eye care. A secondary aim was to evaluate the association of utility indices with demographic profile and waiting time. METHODS: Consecutive patients that had been waiting for ophthalmology care answered the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25). The questionnaire was administered when patients arrived at the clinics for their first visit. We derived a utility index (VFQ-UI) from the patients' responses, then calculated the correlation between this index and waiting time and compared utility across demographic subgroups stratified by age, sex, and care setting. RESULTS: 536 individuals participated in the study (mean age 52.9±16.6 years; 370 women, 69% women). The median utility index was 0.85 (interquartile range [IQR] 0.70-0.92; minimum 0.40, maximum 0.97). The mean VFQ-25 score was 70.88±14.59. Utility correlated weakly and nonsignificantly with waiting time (-0.05, P = 0.24). It did not vary across age groups (P = 0.85) or care settings (P = 0.77). Utility was significantly lower for women (0.84, IQR 0.70-0.92) than men (0.87, IQR 0.73-0.93, P = 0.03), but the magnitude of this difference was small (Cohen's d = 0.13). CONCLUSION: Patients awaiting access to ophthalmology care had a utility index of 0.85 on a scale of 0 to 1. This measurement was not previously reported in the literature. Utility measures can provide insight into patients' perspectives and support economic health analyses and inform health policies.

AB2CO risk score for in-hospital mortality of COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units.

PURPOSE: To develop a mortality risk score for COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU), and to compare it with other existing scores. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective observational study included consecutive adult patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 admitted to ICUs of 18 hospitals from nine Brazilian cities, from September 2021 to July 2022. Potential predictors were selected based on the literature review. Generalized Additive Models were used to examine outcomes and predictors. LASSO regression was used to derive the mortality score. RESULTS: From 558 patients, median age was 69 years (IQR 58-78), 56.3 % were men, 19.7 % required mechanical ventilation (MV), and 44.8 % died. The final model comprised six variables: age, pO2/FiO2, respiratory function (respiratory rate or if in MV), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and obesity. The AB2CO had an AUROC of 0.781 (95 % CI 0.744 to 0.819), good overall performance (Brier score = 0.191) and an excellent calibration (slope = 1.063, intercept = 0.015, p-value = 0.834). The model was compared with other scores and displayed better discrimination ability than the majority of them. CONCLUSIONS: The AB2CO score is a fast and easy tool to be used upon ICU admission.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes in COVID-19 in kidney transplant recipients: a propensity score matched cohort study.

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), especially those on dialysis or who have received a kidney transplant (KT), are considered more vulnerable to severe COVID-19. This susceptibility is attributed to advanced age, a higher frequency of comorbidities, and the chronic immunosuppressed state, which may exacerbate their susceptibility to severe outcomes. Therefore, our study aimed to compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 in KT patients with those on chronic dialysis and non-CKD patients in a propensity score-matched cohort study. This multicentric retrospective cohort included adult COVID-19 laboratory-confirmed patients admitted from March/2020 to July/2022, from 43 Brazilian hospitals. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Propensity score analysis matched KT recipients with controls - patients on chronic dialysis and those without CKD (within 0.25 standard deviations of the logit of the propensity score) - according to age, sex, number of comorbidities, and admission year. This study included 555 patients: 163 KT, 146 on chronic dialysis, and 249 non-CKD patients (median age 57 years, 55.2% women). With regards to clinical outcomes, chronic dialysis patients had a higher prevalence of acute heart failure, compared to KT recipients, furthermore, both groups presented high in-hospital mortality, 34.0 and 28.1%, for KT and chronic dialysis patients, respectively. When comparing KT and non-CKD patients, the first group had a higher incidence of in-hospital dialysis (26.4% vs. 8.8%, p < 0.001), septic shock (24.1% vs. 12.0%, p = 0.002), and mortality (32.5% vs. 23.3%, p = 0.039), in addition to longer time spent in the intensive care unit (ICU). In this study, chronic dialysis patients presented a higher prevalence of acute heart failure, compared to KT recipients, whereas KT patients had a higher frequency of complications than those without CKD, including septic shock, dialysis during hospitalization, and in-hospital mortality as well as longer time spent in the ICU.

Palliative care and COVID-19: acknowledging past mistakes to forge a better future.

Context: COVID-19 induces complex distress across physical, psychological, and social realms and palliative care (PC) has the potential to mitigate this suffering significantly. Objectives: To describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients with an indication of PC, compared to patients who had no indication, in different pandemic waves. Methods: This retrospective multicenter observational cohort included patients from 40 hospitals, admitted from March 2020 to August 2022. Patients who had an indication of palliative care (PC) described in their medical records were included in the palliative care group (PCG), while those who had no such indication in their medical records were allocated to the non-palliative care group (NPCG). Results: Out of 21,158 patients, only 6.7% had indication for PC registered in their medical records. The PCG was older, had a higher frequency of comorbidities, exhibited higher frailty, and had a higher prevalence of clinical complications and mortality (81.4% vs. 17.7%, p < 0.001), when compared to the NPCG. Regarding artificial life support, the PCG had a higher frequency of dialysis (20.4% vs. 10.1%, p < 0.001), invasive mechanical ventilation (48.2% vs. 26.0%, p < 0.001) and admission to the intensive care unit (53.6% vs. 35.4%, p < 0.001). These differences were consistent across all three waves. Conclusion: A low proportion of patients received PC. Patients in PCG were more fragile, had more clinical complications, and had a higher mortality. On the contrary to our expectations, they received more artificial life support in all three waves. Taken together, these findings suggest that decisions regarding PC indication were made too late, within a context of end-of-life and therapeutic failure.

Corrigendum: Assessment of risk scores to predict mortality of COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1130218.].

Effectiveness of nursing interventions in heart failure patients in home care using NANDA-I, NIC, and NOC.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of nursing interventions (NIC) using nursing outcomes (NOC) and based on NANDA-I nursing diagnoses in patients with heart failure in home care. METHOD: In this longitudinal study, 23 patients with heart failure were followed for 6 months, in four home visits. During the visits, nursing diagnoses were established, outcomes assessed, and interventions implemented. RESULTS: Of the 11 NIC interventions implemented, eight proved effective, that is, showed significant improvement between the first and the fourth visit, according to scores obtained for six outcomes: knowledge: treatment regimen, knowledge: medication, compliance behavior, symptom control, activity tolerance, and energy conservation. CONCLUSION: NIC interventions health education, self-modification assistance, behavior modification, teaching: prescribed medication, teaching: disease process, nutritional counseling, telephone consultation, and energy conservation showed effective outcomes based on NOC scores, suggesting that the NANDA-I, NIC, and NOC linkage is useful in patients with heart failure in home care.

Assessment of the ABC2-SPH risk score to predict invasive mechanical ventilation in COVID-19 patients and comparison to other scores.

Background: Predicting the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) is important for the allocation of human and technological resources, improvement of surveillance, and use of effective therapeutic measures. This study aimed (i) to assess whether the ABC2-SPH score is able to predict the receipt of IMV in COVID-19 patients; (ii) to compare its performance with other existing scores; (iii) to perform score recalibration, and to assess whether recalibration improved prediction. Methods: Retrospective observational cohort, which included adult laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted in 32 hospitals, from 14 Brazilian cities. This study was conducted in two stages: (i) for the assessment of the ABC2-SPH score and comparison with other available scores, patients hospitalized from July 31, 2020, to March 31, 2022, were included; (ii) for ABC2-SPH score recalibration and also comparison with other existing scores, patients admitted from January 1, 2021, to March 31, 2022, were enrolled. For both steps, the area under the receiving operator characteristic score (AUROC) was calculated for all scores, while a calibration plot was assessed only for the ABC2-SPH score. Comparisons between ABC2-SPH and the other scores followed the Delong Test recommendations. Logistic recalibration methods were used to improve results and adapt to the studied sample. Results: Overall, 9,350 patients were included in the study, the median age was 58.5 (IQR 47.0-69.0) years old, and 45.4% were women. Of those, 33.5% were admitted to the ICU, 25.2% received IMV, and 17.8% died. The ABC2-SPH score showed a significantly greater discriminatory capacity, than the CURB-65, STSS, and SUM scores, with potentialized results when we consider only patients younger than 80 years old (AUROC 0.714 [95% CI 0.698-0.731]). Thus, after the ABC2-SPH score recalibration, we observed improvements in calibration (slope = 1.135, intercept = 0.242) and overall performance (Brier score = 0.127). Conclusion: The ABC2-SPHr risk score demonstrated a good performance to predict the need for mechanical ventilation in COVID-19 hospitalized patients under 80 years of age.

Real-Life Data on Hydroxychloroquine or Chloroquine with or Without Azithromycin in COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Analysis in Brazil. / Dados de Vida Real sobre o Uso da Hidroxicloroquina ou da Cloroquina Combinadas ou Não à Azitromicina em Pacientes com Covid-19: Uma Análise Retrospectiva no Brasil.

BACKGROUND: Despite no evidence showing benefits of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine with or without azithromycin for COVID-19 treatment, these medications have been largely prescribed in Brazil. OBJECTIVES: To assess outcomes, including in-hospital mortality, electrocardiographic abnormalities, hospital length-of-stay, admission to the intensive care unit, and need for dialysis and mechanical ventilation, in hospitalized COVID-19 patients who received chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine, and to compare outcomes between those patients and their matched controls. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter cohort study that included consecutive laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients from 37 Brazilian hospitals from March to September 2020. Propensity score was used to select matching controls by age, sex, cardiovascular comorbidities, and in-hospital use of corticosteroid. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: From 7,850 COVID-19 patients, 673 (8.6%) received hydroxychloroquine and 67 (0.9%) chloroquine. The median age in the study group was 60 years (46 - 71) and 59.1% were women. During hospitalization, 3.2% of patients presented side effects and 2.2% required therapy discontinuation. Electrocardiographic abnormalities were more prevalent in the chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine group (13.2% vs. 8.2%, p=0.01), and the long corrected QT interval was the main difference (3.6% vs. 0.4%, p<0.001). The median hospital length of stay was longer in the HCQ/CQ + AZT group than in controls (9.0 [5.0, 18.0] vs. 8.0 [4.0, 14.0] days). There was no statistical differences between groups in intensive care unit admission (35.1% vs. 32.0%; p=0.282), invasive mechanical ventilation support (27.0% vs. 22.3%; p=0.074) or mortality (18.9% vs. 18.0%; p=0.682). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 patients treated with chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine had a longer hospital length of stay, when compared to matched controls. Intensive care unit admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, dialysis and in-hospital mortality were similar.

FUNDAMENTO: Apesar da ausência de evidência mostrando benefícios da hidroxicloroquina e da cloroquina combinadas ou não à azitromicina no tratamento da covid-19, esses medicamentos têm sido amplamente prescritos no Brasil. OBJETIVOS: Avaliar desfechos, incluindo moralidade hospitalar, alterações eletrocardiográficas, tempo de internação, admissão na unidade de terapia intensiva, e necessidade de diálise e de ventilação mecânica em pacientes hospitalizados com covid-19 que receberam cloroquina ou hidroxicloroquina, e comparar os desfechos entre aqueles pacientes e seus controles pareados. MÉTODOS: Estudo multicêntrico retrospectivo do tipo coorte que incluiu pacientes com diagnóstico laboratorial de covid-19 de 37 hospitais no Brasil de março a setembro de 2020. Escore de propensão foi usado para selecionar controles pareados quanto a idade, sexo, comorbidades cardiovasculares, e uso de corticosteroides durante a internação. Um valor de p<0,05 foi considerado estatisticamente significativo. RESULTADOS: Dos 7850 pacientes com covid-19, 673 (8,6%) receberam hidroxicloroquina e 67 (0,9%) cloroquina. A idade mediana no grupo de estudo foi 60 (46-71) anos e 59,1% eram mulheres. Durante a internação, 3,2% dos pacientes apresentaram efeitos adversos e 2,2% necessitaram de interromper o tratamento. Alterações eletrocardiográficas foram mais prevalentes no grupo hidroxicloroquina/cloroquina (13,2% vs. 8,2%, p=0,01), e o prolongamento do intervalo QT corrigido foi a principal diferença (3,6% vs. 0,4%, p<0,001). O tempo mediano de internação hospitalar foi maior no grupo usando CQ/HCQ em relação aos controles (9,0 [5,0-18,0] vs. 8,0 [4,0-14,0] dias). Não houve diferenças estatisticamente significativas entre os grupos quanto a admissão na unidade de terapia intensiva (35,1% vs. 32,0%; p=0,282), ventilação mecânica invasiva (27,0% vs. 22,3%; p=0,074) ou mortalidade (18,9% vs. 18,0%; p=0,682). CONCLUSÃO: Pacientes com covid-19 tratados com cloroquina ou hidroxicloroquina apresentaram maior tempo de internação hospitalar, em comparação aos controles. Não houve diferença em relação a admissão em unidade de terapia intensiva, necessidade de ventilação mecânica e mortalidade hospitalar.

Assessment of risk scores to predict mortality of COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit.

Objectives: To assess the ABC2-SPH score in predicting COVID-19 in-hospital mortality, during intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and to compare its performance with other scores (SOFA, SAPS-3, NEWS2, 4C Mortality Score, SOARS, CURB-65, modified CHA2DS2-VASc, and a novel severity score). Materials and methods: Consecutive patients (≥ 18 years) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 admitted to ICUs of 25 hospitals, located in 17 Brazilian cities, from October 2020 to March 2022, were included. Overall performance of the scores was evaluated using the Brier score. ABC2-SPH was used as the reference score, and comparisons between ABC2-SPH and the other scores were performed by using the Bonferroni method of correction. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Results: ABC2-SPH had an area under the curve of 0.716 (95% CI 0.693-0.738), significantly higher than CURB-65, SOFA, NEWS2, SOARS, and modified CHA2DS2-VASc scores. There was no statistically significant difference between ABC2-SPH and SAPS-3, 4C Mortality Score, and the novel severity score. Conclusion: ABC2-SPH was superior to other risk scores, but it still did not demonstrate an excellent predictive ability for mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Our results indicate the need to develop a new score, for this subset of patients.

COVID-19 outcomes in people living with HIV: Peering through the waves.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients infected with HIV, and to compare with a paired sample without HIV infection. METHODS: This is a substudy of a Brazilian multicentric cohort that comprised two periods (2020 and 2021). Data was obtained through the retrospective review of medical records. Primary outcomes were admission to the intensive care unit, invasive mechanical ventilation, and death. Patients with HIV and controls were matched for age, sex, number of comorbidities, and hospital of origin using the technique of propensity score matching (up to 4:1). They were compared using the Chi-Square or Fisher's Exact tests for categorical variables and the Wilcoxon for numerical variables. RESULTS: Throughout the study, 17,101 COVID-19 patients were hospitalized, and 130 (0.76%) of those were infected with HIV. The median age was 54 (IQR: 43.0;64.0) years in 2020 and 53 (IQR: 46.0;63.5) years in 2021, with a predominance of females in both periods. People Living with HIV (PLHIV) and their controls showed similar prevalence for admission to the ICU and invasive mechanical ventilation requirement in the two periods, with no significant differences. In 2020, in-hospital mortality was higher in the PLHIV compared to the controls (27.9% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.049), but there was no difference in mortality between groups in 2021 (25.0% vs. 25.1%; p > 0.999). CONCLUSIONS: Our results reiterate that PLHIV were at higher risk of COVID-19 mortality in the early stages of the pandemic, however, this finding did not sustain in 2021, when the mortality rate is similar to the control group.

Potential and limitations of machine meta-learning (ensemble) methods for predicting COVID-19 mortality in a large inhospital Brazilian dataset.

The majority of early prediction scores and methods to predict COVID-19 mortality are bound by methodological flaws and technological limitations (e.g., the use of a single prediction model). Our aim is to provide a thorough comparative study that tackles those methodological issues, considering multiple techniques to build mortality prediction models, including modern machine learning (neural) algorithms and traditional statistical techniques, as well as meta-learning (ensemble) approaches. This study used a dataset from a multicenter cohort of 10,897 adult Brazilian COVID-19 patients, admitted from March/2020 to November/2021, including patients [median age 60 (interquartile range 48-71), 46% women]. We also proposed new original population-based meta-features that have not been devised in the literature. Stacking has shown to achieve the best results reported in the literature for the death prediction task, improving over previous state-of-the-art by more than 46% in Recall for predicting death, with AUROC 0.826 and MacroF1 of 65.4%. The newly proposed meta-features were highly discriminative of death, but fell short in producing large improvements in final prediction performance, demonstrating that we are possibly on the limits of the prediction capabilities that can be achieved with the current set of ML techniques and (meta-)features. Finally, we investigated how the trained models perform on different hospitals, showing that there are indeed large differences in classifier performance between different hospitals, further making the case that errors are produced by factors that cannot be modeled with the current predictors.