Analysis of COVID-19 in Professionals Working in Geriatric Environment: Multicenter Prospective Study.

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are exposed to a higher risk of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) contamination. This prospective multicenter study describes the characteristics of HCWs tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) while working in a geriatric environment. We also compared HCWs with a positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RTPCR) assay (RTPCR+ group) and those with a negative test result (RTPCR- group). Between 15/5/2020 and 15/9/2020, 258 HCWs, employed in the acute geriatric unit (AGU), geriatric rehabilitation unit (GRU) or nursing home of three hospitals in Burgundy (France) were invited to complete an online survey. Among the 171 respondents, 83 participants, with mean age 42 years and 87.9% female, were tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among these 83 participants, COVID-19 was confirmed in 38 cases (RTPCR+ group) of which 36 were symptomatic, and the RTPCR assay was negative in 45 cases (RTPCR- group) of which 20 participants were symptomatic. A total of 22.9% (of 83) had comorbidities, 21.7% were active smokers, and 65.1% had received the flu vaccine. A total of 37.3% worked in AGU, 19.3% in GRU and 16.9% in nursing homes. The most common symptom described was headache (23.2%), followed by fatigue or cough (12.5% each), and fever or myalgia (10.7% each). There were more participants with normal body mass index (p = 0.03) in the RTPCR+ group. In contrast, there were more users of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (p = 0.01), active smokers (p = 0.03) and flu vaccinated (p = 0.01) in the RTPCR- group. No difference was found between the two groups for the type of work (p = 0.20 for physicians and p = 0.18 for nurses). However, acquiring COVID-19 was significantly associated with working in AGU (p < 0.001) and nursing homes (p = 0.001). There were significantly more users of surgical masks (p = 0.035) in the RTPCR+ group and more filtering facepiece-2 mask users (p = 0.016) in the RTPCR- group. Our results reflect the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic in France. Further studies are needed to evaluate and track the risks and consequences of COVID-19 in HCWs.

Direct Oral Anticoagulants versus Vitamin K Antagonists in Patients Aged 80 Years and Older.

The effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) is non-inferior to vitamin K antagonists (VKA) to treat atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism (VTE). In this cross-sectional study, we compared older persons taking DOACs to those taking VKAs. We included ambulatory individuals ≥80 years, affiliated to Mutualité Sociale Agricole of Burgundy, who were refunded for a medical prescription in September 2017. The demographic conditions, registered chronic diseases (RCD), and number and types of prescribed drugs were compared in the DOAC group and VKA group. Of the 3190 included individuals, 1279 (40%) were prescribed DOACs and 1911 (60%) VKAs. Individuals taking VKAs were older than those taking DOACs (87.11 vs. 86.35 years). In the DOAC group, there were more women (51.92% vs. 48.25%) (p = 0.043), less RCD (89.60% vs. 92.73%) (p = 0.002), less VTE (1.80% vs. 6.59%), less severe heart failure (58.09% vs. 67.87%), less severe hypertension (18.22% vs. 23.60%), less severe kidney diseases (1.49% vs. 3.82%), and fewer drugs per prescription (6.15 vs. 6.66) (p < 0.01 for all). The DOAC group were also less likely to be taking angiotensin receptor blockers (10.79% vs. 13.97%), furosemide (40.81% vs. 49.66%) or digoxin (10.32% vs. 13.66%) than the VKA group (p = 0.009, p < 0.001, and p = 0.005). DOACs were less prescribed than VKAs. Individuals taking VKAs were older and had more severe comorbidities and more drugs per prescription than those taking DOACs.