Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BMC Med Res Methodol ; 23(1): 81, 2023 04 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37016340

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Understanding how SARS-CoV-2 infection impacts long-term patient outcomes requires identification of comparable persons with and without infection. We report the design and implementation of a matching strategy employed by the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) COVID-19 Observational Research Collaboratory (CORC) to develop comparable cohorts of SARS-CoV-2 infected and uninfected persons for the purpose of inferring potential causative long-term adverse effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Veteran population. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study, we identified VA health care system patients who were and were not infected with SARS-CoV-2 on a rolling monthly basis. We generated matched cohorts within each month utilizing a combination of exact and time-varying propensity score matching based on electronic health record (EHR)-derived covariates that can be confounders or risk factors across a range of outcomes. RESULTS: From an initial pool of 126,689,864 person-months of observation, we generated final matched cohorts of 208,536 Veterans infected between March 2020-April 2021 and 3,014,091 uninfected Veterans. Matched cohorts were well-balanced on all 39 covariates used in matching after excluding patients for: no VA health care utilization; implausible age, weight, or height; living outside of the 50 states or Washington, D.C.; prior SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis per Medicare claims; or lack of a suitable match. Most Veterans in the matched cohort were male (88.3%), non-Hispanic (87.1%), white (67.2%), and living in urban areas (71.5%), with a mean age of 60.6, BMI of 31.3, Gagne comorbidity score of 1.4 and a mean of 2.3 CDC high-risk conditions. The most common diagnoses were hypertension (61.4%), diabetes (34.3%), major depression (32.2%), coronary heart disease (28.5%), PTSD (25.5%), anxiety (22.5%), and chronic kidney disease (22.5%). CONCLUSION: This successful creation of matched SARS-CoV-2 infected and uninfected patient cohorts from the largest integrated health system in the United States will support cohort studies of outcomes derived from EHRs and sample selection for qualitative interviews and patient surveys. These studies will increase our understanding of the long-term outcomes of Veterans who were infected with SARS-CoV-2.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Veteranos , Humanos , Masculino , Idoso , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Feminino , COVID-19/epidemiologia , SARS-CoV-2 , Estudos Retrospectivos , Teste para COVID-19 , Medicare
2.
Am J Hypertens ; 36(6): 283-286, 2023 05 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36851820

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Accurate blood pressure (BP) measurement is essential to identify and manage hypertension. Prior studies have reported a difference between BP measured in routine patient care and in research studies. We aimed to investigate the agreement between BP measured in routine care and research-grade BP in Kaiser Permanente Southern California, a large, integrated healthcare system with initiatives to standardize BP measurements during routine patient care visits. METHODS: We included adults ≥65 years old with hypertension, taking antihypertensive medication, and participating in the Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Older Adults (AMBROSIA) study in 2019-2021. Clinic BP from routine care visits was extracted from the electronic health record. Research-grade BP was obtained by trained AMBROSIA study staff via an automatic oscillometric device. The mean difference between routine care and research-grade BP, limits of agreement, and correlation were assessed. RESULTS: We included 309 participants (mean age 75 years; 54% female; 49% non-Hispanic white). Compared with measurements from routine care, mean research-grade systolic BP (SBP) was 0.1 mm Hg higher (95% CI: -1.5 to 1.8) and diastolic BP (DBP) was 0.4 mm Hg lower (95% CI: -1.6 to 0.7). Limits of agreement were -29 to 30 mm Hg for SBP and -21 to 20 mm Hg for DBP. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.42 (95% CI: 0.33 to 0.51) for SBP and 0.43 (95% CI: 0.34 to 0.52) for DBP. CONCLUSIONS: High within-person variation and moderate correlation were present between BP measured in routine care and following a research protocol suggesting the importance of standardized measurements.


Assuntos
Monitorização Ambulatorial da Pressão Arterial , Hipertensão , Humanos , Feminino , Idoso , Masculino , Pressão Sanguínea , Monitorização Ambulatorial da Pressão Arterial/métodos , Hipertensão/diagnóstico , Hipertensão/tratamento farmacológico , Hipertensão/epidemiologia , Anti-Hipertensivos/uso terapêutico , Anti-Hipertensivos/farmacologia , Determinação da Pressão Arterial/métodos , California/epidemiologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA