RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To analyze the clinical characteristics and outcomes of admitted patients with the hospital- versus community-manifested COVID-19 and to evaluate the risk factors related to mortality in the first population. METHODS: This retrospective cohort included consecutive adult patients with COVID-19, hospitalized between March and September 2020. The demographic data, clinical characteristics, and outcomes were extracted from medical records. Patients with hospital-manifested COVID-19 (study group) and those with community-manifested COVID-19 (control group) were matched by the propensity score model. Logistic regression models were used to verify the risk factors for mortality in the study group. RESULTS: Among 7,710 hospitalized patients who had COVID-19, 7.2% developed symptoms while admitted for other reasons. Patients with hospital-manifested COVID-19 had a higher prevalence of cancer (19.2% vs 10.8%) and alcoholism (8.8% vs 2.8%) than patients with community-manifested COVID-19 and also had a higher rate of intensive care unit requirement (45.1% vs 35.2%), sepsis (23.8% vs 14.5%), and death (35.8% vs 22.5%) (P <0.05 for all). The factors independently associated with increased mortality in the study group were increasing age, male sex, number of comorbidities, and cancer. CONCLUSION: Hospital-manifested COVID-19 was associated with increased mortality. Increasing age, male sex, number of comorbidities, and cancer were independent predictors of mortality among those with hospital-manifested COVID-19 disease.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Masculino , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Hospitalização , Comorbidade , Fatores de Risco , Hospitais , Mortalidade HospitalarRESUMO
Resumo Fundamento As complicações cardiovasculares da COVID-19 são aspectos importantes da patogênese e do prognóstico da doença. Evidências do papel prognóstico da troponina e da lesão miocárdica em pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 na América Latina são ainda escassos. Objetivos Avaliar a lesão miocárdica como preditor independente de mortalidade hospitalar e suporte ventilatório mecânico em pacientes hospitalizados, do registro brasileiro de COVID-19. Métodos Este estudo coorte é um subestudo do registro brasileiro de COVID-19, conduzido em 31 hospitais brasileiros de 17 cidades, de março a setembro de 2020. Os desfechos primários incluíram mortalidade hospitalar e suporte ventilatório mecânico invasivo. Os modelos para os desfechos primários foram estimados por regressão de Poisson com variância robusta, com significância estatística de p<0,05. Resultados Dos 2925 pacientes [idade mediana de 60 anos (48-71), 57,1%], 27,3% apresentaram lesão miocárdica. A proporção de pacientes com comorbidades foi maior nos pacientes com lesão miocárdica [mediana 2 (1-2) vs. 1 (0-20)]. Os pacientes com lesão miocárdica apresentaram maiores valores medianos de peptídeo natriurético cerebral, lactato desidrogenase, creatina fosfoquinase, N-terminal do pró-peptídeo natriurético tipo B e proteína C reativa em comparação a pacientes sem lesão miocárdica. Como fatores independentes, proteína C reativa e contagem de plaquetas foram relacionados com o risco de morte, e neutrófilos e contagem de plaquetas foram relacionados ao risco de suporte ventilatório mecânico invasivo. Os pacientes com níveis elevados de troponina apresentaram um maior risco de morte (RR 2,03, IC95% 1,60-2,58) e suporte ventilatório mecânico (RR 1,87;IC95% 1,57-2,23), em comparação àqueles com níveis de troponina normais. Conclusão Lesão cardíaca foi um preditor independente de mortalidade hospitalar e necessidade de suporte ventilatório mecânico em pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19.
Abstract Background Cardiovascular complications of COVID-19 are important aspects of the disease's pathogenesis and prognosis. Evidence on the prognostic role of troponin and myocardial injury in Latin American hospitalized COVID-19 patients is still scarce. Objectives To evaluate myocardial injury as independent predictor of in-hospital mortality and invasive mechanical ventilation support in hospitalized patients, from the Brazilian COVID-19 Registry. Methods This cohort study is a substudy of the Brazilian COVID-19 Registry, conducted in 31 Brazilian hospitals of 17 cities, March-September 2020. Primary outcomes included in-hospital mortality and invasive mechanical ventilation support. Models for the primary outcomes were estimated by Poisson regression with robust variance, with statistical significance of p<0.05. Results Of 2,925 patients (median age of 60 years [48-71], 57.1% men), 27.3% presented myocardial injury. The proportion of patients with comorbidities was higher among patients with cardiac injury (median 2 [1-2] vs. 1 [0-2]). Patients with myocardial injury had higher median levels of brain natriuretic peptide, lactate dehydrogenase, creatine phosphokinase, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, and C-reactive protein than patients without myocardial injury. As independent predictors, C-reactive protein and platelet counts were related to the risk of death, and neutrophils and platelet counts were related to the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation support. Patients with high troponin levels presented a higher risk of death (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.60-2.58) and invasive mechanical ventilation support (RR 1.87, 95% CI 1.57-2.23), when compared to those with normal troponin levels. Conclusion Cardiac injury was an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation support in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.
RESUMO
O tabagismo é um dos principais responsáveis pela carga de doenças no mundo, causando uma a cada oito mortes. Conhecer os instrumentos que caracterizam o uso do tabaco é o primeiro passo para desenvolver pesquisas qualificadas e comparativas para enfrentar esse desafio. O objetivo foi identificar instrumentos e comparar domínios temáticos utilizados em pesquisas populacionais para avaliação do tabagismo nos últimos 5 anos. Foi realizada revisão sistemática em publicações de setembro de 2002 a setembro de 2007. Os termos utilizados foram: (Smok* or tobacco) AND (Questionnaire or scale or score or instrument or assessment or form) AND (*cultural* or translat* or valid* or reproduc* or psychomet*). Foram selecionados 186 artigos do total de 2236. Em apenas 91 havia citação dos instrumentos utilizados. Os principais temas foram perfil e prevalência (38 por cento), dependência (24 por cento) e motivação (10,8 por cento). Questionários definidos foram empregados em 96 por cento dos estudos de dependência. Já nas pesquisas de perfil e prevalência 79 por cento utilizaram questionários próprios. A transparência e a padronização dos instrumentos e a preferência pelo uso de questionários validados são quesitos essenciais para a qualidade e reprodutibilidade das pesquisas sobre o tabagismo.
Smoking is one of the most important causes of illness in the world, responsible for one out of every eight deaths. To know the instruments that characterize the use of tobacco is the first step to develop reliable and comparable research to tackle this challenge. The objective was to identify and compare instruments and domains used in population-based studies over the past five years aiming to determine smoking patterns. A systematic review was conducted on articles published from September 2002 to September 2007. The terms used were: (*Smok or tobacco) AND (Questionnaire or scale or score or instrument or assessment or form) AND (*cultural* or translat* or valid* or reproduc* or psychomet*). Out of 2,236 references, 186 articles were selected, of which only 91 informed the instruments used. From the 91 manuscripts, 49 distinct instruments were identified. The main topics were profile and prevalence (38 percent), dependence (24 percent) and motivation (10.8 percent). The researchers used standard instruments in 96 percent of studies of addiction. The majority of articles about profile and prevalence (79 percent) used self-developed questionnaires. The transparency and standardization of instruments and the preference for the use of validated questionnaires are crucial areas for quality and reproducibility of research on smoking.
Assuntos
Humanos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Fumar , Tabagismo/diagnósticoRESUMO
Smoking is one of the most important causes of illness in the world, responsible for one out of every eight deaths. To know the instruments that characterize the use of tobacco is the first step to develop reliable and comparable research to tackle this challenge. The objective was to identify and compare instruments and domains used in population-based studies over the past five years aiming to determine smoking patterns. A systematic review was conducted on articles published from September 2002 to September 2007. The terms used were: (*Smok or tobacco) AND (Questionnaire or scale or score or instrument or assessment or form) AND (*cultural* or translat* or valid* or reproduc* or psychomet*). Out of 2,236 references, 186 articles were selected, of which only 91 informed the instruments used. From the 91 manuscripts, 49 distinct instruments were identified. The main topics were profile and prevalence (38%), dependence (24%) and motivation (10.8%). The researchers used standard instruments in 96% of studies of addiction. The majority of articles about profile and prevalence (79%) used self-developed questionnaires. The transparency and standardization of instruments and the preference for the use of validated questionnaires are crucial areas for quality and reproducibility of research on smoking.