Delirium in older patients with COVID-19: Prevalence, risk factors and clinical outcomes across the first three waves of the pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: Delirium is a serious condition, which poses treatment challenges during hospitalisation for COVID-19. Improvements in testing, vaccination and treatment might have changed patient characteristics and outcomes through the pandemic. We evaluated whether the prevalence and risk factors for delirium, and the association of delirium with in-hospital mortality changed through the pandemic. METHODS: This study was part of the COVID-OLD study in 19 Dutch hospitals including patients ≥70 years in the first (spring 2020), second (autumn 2020) and third wave (autumn 2021). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to study risk factors for delirium, and in-hospital mortality. Differences in effect sizes between waves were studied by including interaction terms between wave and risk factor in logistic regression models. RESULTS: 1540, 884 and 370 patients were included in the first, second and third wave, respectively. Prevalence of delirium in the third wave (12.7%) was significantly lower compared to the first (22.5%) and second wave (23.5%). In multivariable-adjusted analyses, pre-existing memory problems was a consistent risk factor for delirium across waves. Previous delirium was a risk factor for delirium in the first wave (OR 4.02), but not in the second (OR 1.61) and third wave (OR 2.59, p-value interaction-term 0.028). In multivariable-adjusted analyses, delirium was not associated with in-hospital mortality in all waves. CONCLUSION: Delirium prevalence declined in the third wave, which might be the result of vaccination and improved treatment strategies. Risk factors for delirium remained consistent across waves, although some attenuation was seen in the second wave.

Differences in characteristics and outcomes of older patients hospitalized for COVID-19 after introduction of vaccination.

PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to investigate characteristics and outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated older patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection. METHODS: A retrospective multicentre cohort study among patients aged ≥70 years hospitalized for COVID-19 infection. RESULTS: 263 vaccinated and 82 unvaccinated patients were included. Vaccinated patients were older (median age 79 vs. 76 years; p < 0.001), more patients were male (66.2% vs. 53.7%; p = 0.040), had more comorbidities [median Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) 2 vs. 1; p 0.016] and were frailer [Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) ≥ 4 68% vs. 49%; p 0.015]. Vaccinated patients were admitted earlier after symptom onset (median 5 days vs. 7 days) but were equally ill at time of hospital admission. After correction for frailty, comorbidity and disease severity, risk of in-hospital mortality was three times lower for vaccinated patients (HR 0.30 95% CI 0.16-0.56; p < 0.001) compared to unvaccinated patients. CONCLUSION: Vaccinated patients had lower risk of in-hospital mortality than unvaccinated patients with COVID-19 infection. These findings suggest that vaccinated patients benefit from the protective effect of the vaccine against death during hospital stay, outweighing the increased mortality risk that is associated with older age, greater frailty and more numerous comorbidities. This could be an encouragement for older people to receive age-appropriate vaccines, although no definite conclusions can be drawn for this was no intervention study.

Preparing for future pandemics: frailty associates with mortality in hospitalised older people during the entire COVID-19 pandemic, a Dutch multicentre cohort study.

PURPOSE: Viral mutations and improved prevention or treatment options may have changed the association of frailty with mortality throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. We investigated how associations of frailty with in-hospital mortality changed throughout the pandemic in older people hospitalised for COVID-19. METHODS: The COVID-OLD study included COVID-19 patients aged ≥ 70 years hospitalised during the first (early 2020), second (late 2020), third (late 2021) or fourth wave (early 2022). Based on the clinical frailty scale, patients were categorised as fit (1-3), pre-frail (4-5) or frail (6-9). Associations of frailty with in-hospital mortality were assessed with pairwise comparisons with fit as reference category and modelled using binary logistic regression adjusted for age and sex. RESULTS: This study included 2362 patients (mean age 79.7 years, 60% men). In the first wave, in-hospital mortality was 46% in patients with frailty and 27% in fit patients. In-hospital mortality decreased in each subsequent wave to 25% in patients with frailty and 11% in fit patients in the fourth wave. After adjustments, an overall higher risk of in-hospital mortality was found in frail (OR 2.26, 95% CI: 1.66-3.07) and pre-frail (OR 1.73, 95% CI: 1.27-2.35) patients compared to fit patients, which did not change over time (p for interaction = 0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty remained associated with a higher risk of in-hospital mortality throughout the entire COVID-19 pandemic, although overall in-hospital mortality rates decreased. Frailty therefore remains a relevant risk factor in all stages of a pandemic and is important to consider in prevention and treatment guidelines for future pandemics.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the continuity of care for at-risk patients in Swiss primary care settings: A mixed-methods study.

Continuity of care is important for the health of aging individuals with comorbidities. When initial coronavirus mitigation campaigns involved messaging such as "Stay at home-stay safe," and banned provision of non-urgent care, at-risk patients depending upon regular consultations with general practitioners (GPs) faced confusion about the possibility of seeking non-COVID-19 related healthcare. We employed a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design, consisting of a quantitative component followed by a qualitative component, to understand at-risk patients' health services use during the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland. Quantitatively, we used electronic medical records data from 272 GPs and 266,796 patients. Based on pre-pandemic data, we predicted weekly consultation counts as well as weekly measurement counts (blood pressure, glycated hemoglobin, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol) per 100 patients that would be expected in 2020 in absence of a pandemic and compared those to actual observed values. Qualitatively, we conducted 23 semi-structured interviews with 24 GPs (∼45 min) and 37 interviews with at-risk patients (∼35 min). Quantitative results demonstrate a significant decrease in consultation and measurement counts during the first shutdown period, with consultation counts quickly returning to normal and moving within expected values for the rest of 2020. Qualitative data contextualize these findings with GPs describing constantly implementing material, administrative, and communication changes. GPs reported communication gaps with the authorities and noted a lack of clear guidelines delineating how to define "at-risk patients" and what cases were "urgent" to treat during shutdowns. Patient interviews show that patient-level factors, such as fear of contracting coronavirus, perceptions that GPs were overburdened, and a sense of solidarity, influenced patients' decisions to consult less at the beginning of the pandemic. Findings demonstrate communication gaps during pandemic periods and provide valuable lessons for future pandemic preparedness, particularly the need for contingency plans for the overall healthcare system instead of plans focusing only on the infectious agent itself.