Post-acute health care burden after SARS-CoV-2 infection: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The post-acute burden of health care use after SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. We sought to quantify the post-acute burden of health care use after SARS-CoV-2 infection among community-dwelling adults in Ontario by comparing those with positive and negative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test results for SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving community-dwelling adults in Ontario who had a PCR test between Jan. 1, 2020, and Mar. 31, 2021. Follow-up began 56 days after PCR testing. We matched people 1:1 on a comprehensive propensity score. We compared per-person-year rates for health care encounters at the mean and 99th percentiles, and compared counts using negative binomial models, stratified by sex. RESULTS: Among 531 702 matched people, mean age was 44 (standard deviation [SD] 17) years and 51% were female. Females who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 had a mean of 1.98 (95% CI 1.63 to 2.29) more health care encounters overall per-person-year than those who had a negative test result, with 0.31 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.56) more home care encounters to 0.81 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.93) more long-term care days. At the 99th percentile per-person-year, females who tested positive had 6.48 more days of hospital admission and 28.37 more home care encounters. Males who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 had 0.66 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.99) more overall health care encounters per-person-year than those who tested negative, with 0.14 (95% CI 0.06 to 0.21) more outpatient encounters and 0.48 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.60) long-term care days, and 0.43 (95% CI -0.67 to -0.21) fewer home care encounters. At the 99th percentile, they had 8.69 more days in hospital per-person-year, with fewer home care (-27.31) and outpatient (-0.87) encounters. INTERPRETATION: We found significantly higher rates of health care use after a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test in an analysis that matched test-positive with test-negative people. Stakeholders can use these findings to prepare for health care demand associated with post-COVID-19 condition (long COVID).

I'm here because I was told to come: a study of cancer patients' reasons for attending the emergency department.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with cancer are seen frequently in emergency departments (EDs). It has been proposed that many of these visits are preventable, but the patient perspective has not been well-studied. METHODS: We conducted structured interviews with a convenience sample of patients who presented to a single ED with a cancer-related complaint. We asked standardized questions regarding patient predisposing characteristics, enabling factors (e.g., access to support), and perceived need for care. We compared the reported perceived need with the evaluated need by ED healthcare providers. Themes were identified using descriptive content analysis. RESULTS: Forty-five patients completed interviews, of whom 30 (67%) were admitted to hospital. The most frequent reasons for seeking ED care were pain (includes abdominal) (33%), fever (11%), and weakness (11%). The majority (77%) did not make the decision to go to the ED alone: healthcare providers (40%, most commonly oncologists) and caregivers (36%) were the reported decision-makers in these cases. The majority (73%) felt their ED visit was not preventable. Themes of an alternative oncological setting for tests, improved community services, and both earlier medication management and referral to specialist care were identified from patients who reported their visit was avoidable. Congruence between (patient) perceived need and evaluated need was high (96%). CONCLUSIONS: The minority of patients made the decision to seek ED care by themselves. While the majority did not believe emergency care was avoidable, those who did had cogent suggestions to that end. Patient's assessments of their own need had high agreement with ED providers' evaluations.

High blood pressure readings on in-store machines: a qualitative study of the perspective of pharmacy staff.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency department (ED) visits for high blood pressure are on the rise. Yet the majority of these patients are discharged home after their ED evaluation, particularly those who present following an elevated reading on an in-store pharmacy machine. We aimed to gain insight on the practice and referral patterns of pharmacy staff who encounter a patient with an elevated in-store blood pressure (BP) reading. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with pharmacy staff (pharmacists and pharmacy technicians/assistants) from California, United States and Ontario, Canada. Interview questions were designed to examine the practice and referral patterns of pharmacy staff for patients with elevated in-store BP readings. Standard descriptive content analysis techniques were used to analyze the data and to develop themes for current practice and referral patterns. RESULTS: Twenty-four interviews were completed: six with pharmacy technicians/assistants and 18 with pharmacists. Canadian pharmacy staff (83%) reported being approached frequently (defined as from weekly up to multiple times per day) by patients concerned about an elevated BP reading on an in-store machine, versus 50% reported by American participants. Participant definition of an elevated BP varied, with systolic values ranging from 120 to 150 mmHg and diastolic values from 60 to 90 mmHg. Participants emphasized the need to converse with and assess their patients prior to providing advice. The most frequently reported advice was to seek referral from an outside health care provider: ED, urgent care, or a primary care practitioner. Severity of the BP reading and symptomatology were reported as determining factors for referring patients to the ED. Pharmacists (92%) reported a lack of corporate and/or governing body policy for managing patients with in-store markedly elevated BP readings. CONCLUSIONS: Managing patients with an elevated BP reading in the community pharmacy setting is complex and not standardized. Referral to an external health care provider, including the ED, was a common theme. The development of a pharmacy referral tool/algorithm may be helpful to refer in-store patients with elevated BP readings to the most appropriate healthcare resources.

Assessing effective mask use by the public in two countries: an observational study.

OBJECTIVES: During the COVID-19 pandemic wearing a mask in public has been recommended in some settings and mandated in others. How often this advice is followed, how well, and whether it inadvertently leads to more disease transmission opportunities due to a combination of improper use and physical distancing lapses is unknown. DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study performed in June-August 2020. SETTING: Eleven outdoor and indoor public settings (some with mandated mask use, some without) each in Toronto, Ontario, and in Portland, Oregon. PARTICIPANTS: All passers-by in the study settings. OUTCOME MEASURES: Mask use, incorrect mask use, and number of breaches (ie, coming within 2 m of someone else where both parties were not properly masked). RESULTS: We observed 36 808 persons, the majority of whom were estimated to be aged 31-65 years (49%). Two-thirds (66.7%) were wearing a mask and 13.6% of mask-wearers wore them incorrectly. Mandatory mask-use settings were overwhelmingly associated with mask use (adjusted OR 79.2; 95% CI 47.4 to 135.1). Younger age, male sex, Torontonians, and public transit or airport settings (vs in a store) were associated with lower adjusted odds of wearing a mask. Mandatory mask-use settings were associated with lower adjusted odds of mask error (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.73), along with female sex and Portland subjects. Subjects aged 81+ years (vs 31-65 years) and those on public transit and at the airport (vs stores) had higher odds of mask errors. Mask-wearers had a large reduction in adjusted mean number of breaches (rate ratio (RR) 0.19; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.20). The 81+ age group had the largest association with breaches (RR 7.77; 95% CI 5.32 to 11.34). CONCLUSIONS: Mandatory mask use was associated with a large increase in mask-wearing. Despite 14% of them wearing their masks incorrectly, mask users had a large reduction in the mean number of breaches (disease transmission opportunities). The elderly and transit users may warrant public health interventions aimed at improving mask use.