Risk of COVID-19 Hospitalization and Protection Associated With mRNA Vaccination Among US Adults With Psychiatric Disorders.

BACKGROUND: Although psychiatric disorders have been associated with reduced immune responses to other vaccines, it remains unknown whether they influence COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE). This study evaluated risk of COVID-19 hospitalization and estimated mRNA VE stratified by psychiatric disorder status. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort analysis of the VISION Network in four US states, the rate of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalization between December 2021 and August 2022 was compared across psychiatric diagnoses and by monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccination status using Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Among 2,436,999 adults, 22.1% had ≥1 psychiatric disorder. The incidence of COVID-19-associated hospitalization was higher among patients with any versus no psychiatric disorder (394 vs. 156 per 100,000 person-years, p < 0.001). Any psychiatric disorder (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.27; 95% CI, 1.18-1.37) and mood (aHR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.15-1.36), anxiety (aHR, 1.33, 95% CI, 1.22-1.45), and psychotic (aHR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.14-1.74) disorders were each significant independent predictors of hospitalization. Among patients with any psychiatric disorder, aHRs for the association between vaccination and hospitalization were 0.35 (95% CI, 0.25-0.49) after a recent second dose, 0.08 (95% CI, 0.06-0.11) after a recent third dose, and 0.33 (95% CI, 0.17-0.66) after a recent fourth dose, compared to unvaccinated patients. Corresponding VE estimates were 65%, 92%, and 67%, respectively, and were similar among patients with no psychiatric disorder (68%, 92%, and 79%). CONCLUSION: Psychiatric disorders were associated with increased risk of COVID-19-associated hospitalization. However, mRNA vaccination provided similar protection regardless of psychiatric disorder status, highlighting its benefit for individuals with psychiatric disorders.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines at preventing emergency department or urgent care encounters and hospitalizations among immunocompromised adults: An observational study of real-world data across 10 US states from August-December 2021.

BACKGROUND: Immunocompromised (IC) persons are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes and are less protected by 1-2 COVID-19 vaccine doses than are immunocompetent (non-IC) persons. We compared vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically attended COVID-19 of 2-3 mRNA and 1-2 viral-vector vaccine doses between IC and non-IC adults. METHODS: Using a test-negative design among eight VISION Network sites, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) events and hospitalizations from 26 August-25 December 2021 was estimated separately among IC and non-IC adults and among specific IC condition subgroups. Vaccination status was defined using number and timing of doses. VE for each status (versus unvaccinated) was adjusted for age, geography, time, prior positive test result, and local SARS-CoV-2 circulation. RESULTS: We analyzed 8,848 ED/UC events and 18,843 hospitalizations among IC patients and 200,071 ED/UC events and 70,882 hospitalizations among non-IC patients. Among IC patients, 3-dose mRNA VE against ED/UC (73% [95% CI: 64-80]) and hospitalization (81% [95% CI: 76-86]) was lower than that among non-IC patients (ED/UC: 94% [95% CI: 93-94]; hospitalization: 96% [95% CI: 95-97]). Similar patterns were observed for viral-vector vaccines. Transplant recipients had lower VE than other IC subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: During B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance, IC adults received moderate protection against COVID-19-associated medical events from three mRNA doses, or one viral-vector dose plus a second dose of any product. However, protection was lower in IC versus non-IC patients, especially among transplant recipients, underscoring the need for additional protection among IC adults.

Protection From COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination and Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection Against COVID-19-Associated Encounters in Adults During Delta and Omicron Predominance.

BACKGROUND: Data assessing protection conferred from COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and/or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection during Delta and Omicron predominance periods in the United States are limited. METHODS: This cohort study included persons ≥18 years who had ≥1 health care encounter across 4 health systems and had been tested for SARS-CoV-2 before 26 August 2021. COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection defined the exposure. Cox regression estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for the Delta and Omicron periods; protection was calculated as (1-HR)×100%. RESULTS: Compared to unvaccinated and previously uninfected persons, during Delta predominance, protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations was high for those 2- or 3-dose vaccinated and previously infected, 3-dose vaccinated alone, and prior infection alone (range, 91%-97%, with overlapping 95% confidence intervals [CIs]); during Omicron predominance, estimates were lower (range, 77%-90%). Protection against COVID-19-associated emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) encounters during Delta predominance was high for those exposure groups (range, 86%-93%); during Omicron predominance, protection remained high for those 3-dose vaccinated with or without a prior infection (76%; 95% CI = 67%-83% and 71%; 95% CI = 67%-73%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and/or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection provided protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations and ED/UC encounters regardless of variant. Staying up-to-date with COVID-19 vaccination still provides protection against severe COVID-19 disease, regardless of prior infection.

Relationships Between Social Vulnerability and Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination Coverage and Vaccine Effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination coverage remains lower in communities with higher social vulnerability. Factors such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exposure risk and access to healthcare are often correlated with social vulnerability and may therefore contribute to a relationship between vulnerability and observed vaccine effectiveness (VE). Understanding whether these factors impact VE could contribute to our understanding of real-world VE. METHODS: We used electronic health record data from 7 health systems to assess vaccination coverage among patients with medically attended COVID-19-like illness. We then used a test-negative design to assess VE for 2- and 3-dose messenger RNA (mRNA) adult (≥18 years) vaccine recipients across Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) quartiles. SVI rankings were determined by geocoding patient addresses to census tracts; rankings were grouped into quartiles for analysis. RESULTS: In July 2021, primary series vaccination coverage was higher in the least vulnerable quartile than in the most vulnerable quartile (56% vs 36%, respectively). In February 2022, booster dose coverage among persons who had completed a primary series was higher in the least vulnerable quartile than in the most vulnerable quartile (43% vs 30%). VE among 2-dose and 3-dose recipients during the Delta and Omicron BA.1 periods of predominance was similar across SVI quartiles. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination coverage varied substantially by SVI. Differences in VE estimates by SVI were minimal across groups after adjusting for baseline patient factors. However, lower vaccination coverage among more socially vulnerable groups means that the burden of illness is still disproportionately borne by the most socially vulnerable populations.

Daily Oxygenation Support for Patients Hospitalized With SARS-CoV-2 in an Integrated Health System.

BACKGROUND: Many COVID-19 studies are constructed to report hospitalization outcomes, with few large multi-center population-based reports on the time course of intra-hospitalization characteristics, including daily oxygenation support requirements. Comprehensive epidemiologic profiles of oxygenation methods used by day and by week during hospitalization across all severities are important to illustrate the clinical and economic burden of COVID-19 hospitalizations. METHODS: This was a retrospective, multi-center observational cohort study of 15,361 consecutive hospitalizations of patients with COVID-19 at 25 adult acute care hospitals in Texas participating in the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Respiratory Illness Universal Study COVID-19 registry. RESULTS: At initial hospitalization, the majority required nasal cannula (44.0%), with an increasing proportion of invasive mechanical ventilation in the first week and particularly the weeks to follow. After 4 weeks of acute illness, 69.9% of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 required intermediate (eg, high-flow nasal cannula, noninvasive ventilation) or advanced respiratory support (ie, invasive mechanical ventilation), with similar proportions that extended to hospitalizations that lasted ≥ 6 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Data representation of intra-hospital processes of care drawn from hospitals with varied size, teaching and trauma designations is important to presenting a balanced perspective of care delivery mechanisms employed, such as daily oxygen method utilization.

Waning of vaccine effectiveness against moderate and severe covid-19 among adults in the US from the VISION network: test negative, case-control study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against moderate and severe covid-19 in adults by time since second, third, or fourth doses, and by age and immunocompromised status. DESIGN: Test negative case-control study. SETTING: Hospitals, emergency departments, and urgent care clinics in 10 US states, 17 January 2021 to 12 July 2022. PARTICIPANTS: 893 461 adults (≥18 years) admitted to one of 261 hospitals or to one of 272 emergency department or 119 urgent care centers for covid-like illness tested for SARS-CoV-2. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome was waning of vaccine effectiveness with BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine during the omicron and delta periods, and the period before delta was dominant using logistic regression conditioned on calendar week and geographic area while adjusting for age, race, ethnicity, local virus circulation, immunocompromised status, and likelihood of being vaccinated. RESULTS: 45 903 people admitted to hospital with covid-19 (cases) were compared with 213 103 people with covid-like illness who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 (controls), and 103 287 people admitted to emergency department or urgent care with covid-19 (cases) were compared with 531 168 people with covid-like illness who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. In the omicron period, vaccine effectiveness against covid-19 requiring admission to hospital was 89% (95% confidence interval 88% to 90%) within two months after dose 3 but waned to 66% (63% to 68%) by four to five months. Vaccine effectiveness of three doses against emergency department or urgent care visits was 83% (82% to 84%) initially but waned to 46% (44% to 49%) by four to five months. Waning was evident in all subgroups, including young adults and individuals who were not immunocompromised; although waning was morein people who were immunocompromised. Vaccine effectiveness increased among most groups after a fourth dose in whom this booster was recommended. CONCLUSIONS: Effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against moderate and severe covid-19 waned with time after vaccination. The findings support recommendations for a booster dose after a primary series and consideration of additional booster doses.

Effectiveness of 2, 3, and 4 COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Doses Among Immunocompetent Adults During Periods when SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 and BA.2/BA.2.12.1 Sublineages Predominated - VISION Network, 10 States, December 2021-June 2022.

The Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, was first identified in the United States in November 2021, with the BA.1 sublineage (including BA.1.1) causing the largest surge in COVID-19 cases to date. Omicron sublineages BA.2 and BA.2.12.1 emerged later and by late April 2022, accounted for most cases.* Estimates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) can be reduced by newly emerging variants or sublineages that evade vaccine-induced immunity (1), protection from previous SARS-CoV-2 infection in unvaccinated persons (2), or increasing time since vaccination (3). Real-world data comparing VE during the periods when the BA.1 and BA.2/BA.2.12.1 predominated (BA.1 period and BA.2/BA.2.12.1 period, respectively) are limited. The VISION network† examined 214,487 emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits and 58,782 hospitalizations with a COVID-19-like illness§ diagnosis among 10 states during December 18, 2021-June 10, 2022, to evaluate VE of 2, 3, and 4 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] or mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) compared with no vaccination among adults without immunocompromising conditions. VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization 7-119 days and ≥120 days after receipt of dose 3 was 92% (95% CI = 91%-93%) and 85% (95% CI = 81%-89%), respectively, during the BA.1 period, compared with 69% (95% CI = 58%-76%) and 52% (95% CI = 44%-59%), respectively, during the BA.2/BA.2.12.1 period. Patterns were similar for ED/UC encounters. Among adults aged ≥50 years, VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization ≥120 days after receipt of dose 3 was 55% (95% CI = 46%-62%) and ≥7 days (median = 27 days) after a fourth dose was 80% (95% CI = 71%-85%) during BA.2/BA.2.12.1 predominance. Immunocompetent persons should receive recommended COVID-19 booster doses to prevent moderate to severe COVID-19, including a first booster dose for all eligible persons and second booster dose for adults aged ≥50 years at least 4 months after an initial booster dose. Booster doses should be obtained immediately when persons become eligible.¶.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccination in Preventing COVID-19-Associated Emergency Department and Urgent Care Encounters and Hospitalizations Among Nonimmunocompromised Children and Adolescents Aged 5-17 Years - VISION Network, 10 States, April 2021-January 2022.

The efficacy of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 exceeded 90% in clinical trials that included children and adolescents aged 5-11, 12-15, and 16-17 years (1-3). Limited real-world data on 2-dose mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) in persons aged 12-17 years (referred to as adolescents in this report) have also indicated high levels of protection against SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) infection and COVID-19-associated hospitalization (4-6); however, data on VE against the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant and duration of protection are limited. Pfizer-BioNTech VE data are not available for children aged 5-11 years. In partnership with CDC, the VISION Network* examined 39,217 emergency department (ED) and urgent care (UC) encounters and 1,699 hospitalizations† among persons aged 5-17 years with COVID-19-like illness across 10 states during April 9, 2021-January 29, 2022,§ to estimate VE using a case-control test-negative design. Among children aged 5-11 years, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters 14-67 days after dose 2 (the longest interval after dose 2 in this age group) was 46%. Among adolescents aged 12-15 and 16-17 years, VE 14-149 days after dose 2 was 83% and 76%, respectively; VE ≥150 days after dose 2 was 38% and 46%, respectively. Among adolescents aged 16-17 years, VE increased to 86% ≥7 days after dose 3 (booster dose). VE against COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters was substantially lower during the Omicron predominant period than the B.1.617.2 (Delta) predominant period among adolescents aged 12-17 years, with no significant protection ≥150 days after dose 2 during Omicron predominance. However, in adolescents aged 16-17 years, VE during the Omicron predominant period increased to 81% ≥7 days after a third booster dose. During the full study period, including pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron predominant periods, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalization among children aged 5-11 years was 74% 14-67 days after dose 2, with wide CIs that included zero. Among adolescents aged 12-15 and 16-17 years, VE 14-149 days after dose 2 was 92% and 94%, respectively; VE ≥150 days after dose 2 was 73% and 88%, respectively. All eligible children and adolescents should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations, including a booster dose for those aged 12-17 years.

Waning 2-Dose and 3-Dose Effectiveness of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19-Associated Emergency Department and Urgent Care Encounters and Hospitalizations Among Adults During Periods of Delta and Omicron Variant Predominance - VISION Network, 10 States, August 2021-January 2022.

CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥12 years receive a booster dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine ≥5 months after completion of a primary mRNA vaccination series and that immunocompromised persons receive a third primary dose.* Waning of vaccine protection after 2 doses of mRNA vaccine has been observed during the period of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance† (1-5), but little is known about durability of protection after 3 doses during periods of Delta or SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant predominance. A test-negative case-control study design using data from eight VISION Network sites§ examined vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits and hospitalizations among U.S. adults aged ≥18 years at various time points after receipt of a second or third vaccine dose during two periods: Delta variant predominance and Omicron variant predominance (i.e., periods when each variant accounted for ≥50% of sequenced isolates).¶ Persons categorized as having received 3 doses included those who received a third dose in a primary series or a booster dose after a 2 dose primary series (including the reduced-dosage Moderna booster). The VISION Network analyzed 241,204 ED/UC encounters** and 93,408 hospitalizations across 10 states during August 26, 2021-January 22, 2022. VE after receipt of both 2 and 3 doses was lower during the Omicron-predominant than during the Delta-predominant period at all time points evaluated. During both periods, VE after receipt of a third dose was higher than that after a second dose; however, VE waned with increasing time since vaccination. During the Omicron period, VE against ED/UC visits was 87% during the first 2 months after a third dose and decreased to 66% among those vaccinated 4-5 months earlier; VE against hospitalizations was 91% during the first 2 months following a third dose and decreased to 78% ≥4 months after a third dose. For both Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods, VE was generally higher for protection against hospitalizations than against ED/UC visits. All eligible persons should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations to best protect against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations and ED/UC visits.

Effectiveness of a Third Dose of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19-Associated Emergency Department and Urgent Care Encounters and Hospitalizations Among Adults During Periods of Delta and Omicron Variant Predominance - VISION Network, 10 States, August 2021-January 2022.

Estimates of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) have declined in recent months (1,2) because of waning vaccine induced immunity over time,* possible increased immune evasion by SARS-CoV-2 variants (3), or a combination of these and other factors. CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥12 years receive a third dose (booster) of an mRNA vaccine ≥5 months after receipt of the second mRNA vaccine dose and that immunocompromised individuals receive a third primary dose.† A third dose of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 vaccine increases neutralizing antibody levels (4), and three recent studies from Israel have shown improved effectiveness of a third dose in preventing COVID-19 associated with infections with the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant (5-7). Yet, data are limited on the real-world effectiveness of third doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in the United States, especially since the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant became predominant in mid-December 2021. The VISION Network§ examined VE by analyzing 222,772 encounters from 383 emergency departments (EDs) and urgent care (UC) clinics and 87,904 hospitalizations from 259 hospitals among adults aged ≥18 years across 10 states from August 26, 2021¶ to January 5, 2022. Analyses were stratified by the period before and after the Omicron variant became the predominant strain (>50% of sequenced viruses) at each study site. During the period of Delta predominance across study sites in the United States (August-mid-December 2021), VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters was 86% 14-179 days after dose 2, 76% ≥180 days after dose 2, and 94% ≥14 days after dose 3. Estimates of VE for the same intervals after vaccination during Omicron variant predominance were 52%, 38%, and 82%, respectively. During the period of Delta variant predominance, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations was 90% 14-179 days after dose 2, 81% ≥180 days after dose 2, and 94% ≥14 days after dose 3. During Omicron variant predominance, VE estimates for the same intervals after vaccination were 81%, 57%, and 90%, respectively. The highest estimates of VE against COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters or hospitalizations during both Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods were among adults who received a third dose of mRNA vaccine. All unvaccinated persons should get vaccinated as soon as possible. All adults who have received mRNA vaccines during their primary COVID-19 vaccination series should receive a third dose when eligible, and eligible persons should stay up to date with COVID-19 vaccinations.

Laboratory-Confirmed COVID-19 Among Adults Hospitalized with COVID-19-Like Illness with Infection-Induced or mRNA Vaccine-Induced SARS-CoV-2 Immunity - Nine States, January-September 2021.

Previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) or COVID-19 vaccination can provide immunity and protection from subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection and illness. CDC used data from the VISION Network* to examine hospitalizations in adults with COVID-19-like illness and compared the odds of receiving a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, and thus having laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, between unvaccinated patients with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection occurring 90-179 days before COVID-19-like illness hospitalization, and patients who were fully vaccinated with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine 90-179 days before hospitalization with no previous documented SARS-CoV-2 infection. Hospitalized adults aged ≥18 years with COVID-19-like illness were included if they had received testing at least twice: once associated with a COVID-19-like illness hospitalization during January-September 2021 and at least once earlier (since February 1, 2020, and ≥14 days before that hospitalization). Among COVID-19-like illness hospitalizations in persons whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, the odds of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (adjusted for sociodemographic and health characteristics) among unvaccinated, previously infected adults were higher than the odds among fully vaccinated recipients of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine with no previous documented infection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 5.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.75-10.99). These findings suggest that among hospitalized adults with COVID-19-like illness whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, vaccine-induced immunity was more protective than infection-induced immunity against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. All eligible persons should be vaccinated against COVID-19 as soon as possible, including unvaccinated persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Effectiveness of 2-Dose Vaccination with mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Against COVID-19-Associated Hospitalizations Among Immunocompromised Adults - Nine States, January-September 2021.

Immunocompromised persons, defined as those with suppressed humoral or cellular immunity resulting from health conditions or medications, account for approximately 3% of the U.S. adult population (1). Immunocompromised adults are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes (2) and might not acquire the same level of protection from COVID-19 mRNA vaccines as do immunocompetent adults (3,4). To evaluate vaccine effectiveness (VE) among immunocompromised adults, data from the VISION Network* on hospitalizations among persons aged ≥18 years with COVID-19-like illness from 187 hospitals in nine states during January 17-September 5, 2021 were analyzed. Using selected discharge diagnoses,† VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization conferred by completing a 2-dose series of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine ≥14 days before the index hospitalization date§ (i.e., being fully vaccinated) was evaluated using a test-negative design comparing 20,101 immunocompromised adults (10,564 [53%] of whom were fully vaccinated) and 69,116 immunocompetent adults (29,456 [43%] of whom were fully vaccinated). VE of 2 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was lower among immunocompromised patients (77%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 74%-80%) than among immunocompetent patients (90%; 95% CI = 89%-91%). This difference persisted irrespective of mRNA vaccine product, age group, and timing of hospitalization relative to SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance in the state of hospitalization. VE varied across immunocompromising condition subgroups, ranging from 59% (organ or stem cell transplant recipients) to 81% (persons with a rheumatologic or inflammatory disorder). Immunocompromised persons benefit from mRNA COVID-19 vaccination but are less protected from severe COVID-19 outcomes than are immunocompetent persons, and VE varies among immunocompromised subgroups. Immunocompromised persons receiving mRNA COVID-19 vaccines should receive 3 doses and a booster, consistent with CDC recommendations (5), practice nonpharmaceutical interventions, and, if infected, be monitored closely and considered early for proven therapies that can prevent severe outcomes.

Factors affecting time between symptom onset and emergency department arrival in stroke patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Delays in seeking care compromise diagnosis, treatment options, and outcomes in ischemic strokes. This study identified factors associated with time between stroke symptom onset and emergency department (ED) arrival at a private nonprofit medical center serving a large rural catchment area in central Texas, with the goal of identifying symptomatic, demographic, and historical factors that might influence seeking care. METHODS: Demographic and clinical data from a large tertiary care center's Get With The Guidelines (GWTG) database were evaluated in 1874 patients presenting to the ED with a diagnosis of transient ischemic attack (TIA), intracranial hemorrhage, subarachnoid hemorrhage, or ischemic stroke. The dependent variable was time between discovery of stroke symptoms and presentation at the hospital (time-to-ED). Factors entered into regression models predicting time-to-ED within 4 h or categorical time-to-ED. RESULTS: The average time from symptom onset to presentation was 15.0 h (sd = 23.2), with 43.6% of the sample presenting within 4 h of symptom onset. Results suggested that female gender (Odds Ratio [OR] = 0.70; 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.23-0.74), drug abuse (OR = 0.41; CI 0.23-0.74), and diabetes were significantly associated with longer time to presentation. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of demographics, stroke severity, timing, and health history contributes to delays in presenting for treatment for ischemic stroke. Stroke education concentrating on symptom recognition may benefit from a special focus on high-risk individuals as highlighted in this study.

Cardiovascular Outcomes Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Newly Initiated on Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors, Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists, and Other Antidiabetic Medications.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the most prevalent cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and is a primary driver for health care costs associated with diabetes management. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have demonstrated significant reductions in cardiovascular endpoints in clinical trials compared with placebo. However, it is uncertain whether these findings can be applied to the broader T2D population because these trials specifically included high-risk patients with established CVD. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare cardiovascular outcomes among adults with T2D newly initiated on SGLT-2is, GLP-1 RAs, and other antidiabetic medications (oADMs) in a real-world setting. METHODS: This retrospective new-user cohort study used administrative claims and electronic health record data from an integrated delivery network in Texas. Patients aged ≥18 years with T2D and ≥1 prescription claim for an SGLT-2i, a GLP-1 RA, or an oADM filled between April 2013 and December 2018 were included. Patients were divided into three 1:1 propensity-matched groups according to index medication identified. Primary outcomes were heart failure hospitalization and a composite end-point of myocardial infarction, stroke, unstable angina, or coronary revascularization. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to compare cumulative incidence of all outcome variables. RESULTS: Among 9,477 patients, 1,134 were initiated on SGLT-2is, 1,072 on GLP-1 RAs, and 7,271 on oADMs. Patients initiating SGLT-2is versus oADMs had significantly lower risk of the composite endpoint (HR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.46-0.90), heart failure hospitalization (HR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.39-0.81), and unstable angina requiring hospitalization (HR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.39-0.81). Patients initiating GLP-1 RAs compared with oADMs had significantly lower risk of the composite endpoint (HR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.52-0.98) and unstable angina requiring hospitalization (HR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.41-0.86). No differences in cardiovascular outcomes were found between SGLT-2is and GLP-1 RAs. CONCLUSIONS: Both SGLT-2is and GLP-1 RAs showed significant reductions in the composite outcome and unstable angina requiring hospitalization versus oADMs. However, only SGLT-2is were associated with a lower risk for heart failure hospitalizations. Nevertheless, cardiovascular outcomes were similar between SGLT-2is and GLP-1 RAs. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.

Association of Opioid-Related Adverse Drug Events With Clinical and Cost Outcomes Among Surgical Patients in a Large Integrated Health Care Delivery System.

Importance: Opioids are commonly used for pain control during and after invasive procedures. However, opioid-related adverse drug events (ORADEs) are common and have been associated with worse patient outcomes. Objectives: To examine the incidence of ORADEs in patients undergoing hospital-based surgical and endoscopic procedures and to evaluate the association of ORADEs with clinical and cost outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this retrospective study of clinical and administrative data, ORADEs were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision diagnosis codes for known adverse effects of opioids or by opioid antagonist use. Multivariable regression analysis was used to measure the association of ORADEs with outcomes after adjusting for potential confounding factors. The setting was 21 acute care hospitals in a large integrated health care delivery system. Participants were 135 379 patients (aged ≥18 years, admitted from January 1, 2013, to September 30, 2015) who underwent surgical and endoscopic procedures and were given opioids. Exposure: Opioid use, reported as morphine milligram equivalent doses. Main Outcomes and Measures: Opioid-related adverse drug events and their association with inpatient mortality, discharge to another care facility, length of stay, cost of hospitalization, and 30-day readmission. Results: Among 135 379 adult patients in this study (67.5% female), 14 386 (10.6%) experienced at least one ORADE. Patients with ORADEs were more likely to be older, of white race/ethnicity, and male and have more comorbidities. Patients with ORADEs received a higher total dose of opioids (median morphine milligram equivalent dose, 46.8 vs 30.0 mg; P < .001) and for a longer duration (median, 3.0 vs 2.0 days; P < .001). In adjusted analyses, ORADEs were associated with increased inpatient mortality (odds ratio [OR], 28.8; 95% CI, 24.0-34.5), greater likelihood of discharge to another care facility (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 2.7-3.0), prolonged length of stay (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 2.8-3.4), high cost of hospitalization (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 2.4-3.0), and higher rate of 30-day readmission (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.2-1.4). ORADEs were associated with a 2.9% increase in absolute mortality, an $8225 increase in cost for the index hospitalization, and a 1.6-day increase in length of stay for the index hospitalization. Conclusions and Relevance: Opioid-related adverse drug events were common among patients undergoing hospital-based invasive procedures and were associated with significantly worse clinical and cost outcomes. Hospital-acquired harm from ORADEs in the surgical patient population is an important opportunity for health systems to improve patient safety and reduce cost.

Multiple chronic condition profiles and survival among oldest-old male patients with hip fracture.

To improve understanding of survival among very elderly male patients with surgically repaired hip fractures, this study applied classification techniques to multiple chronic conditions (MCC) then modeled survival by latent class. Veterans Health Administration (VHA)'s electronic medical records on male inpatients age 85-100 years (n=896) with hip fracture diagnosis and repair were used. MCC defined by Charlson and Elixhauser disorders, medications, demographic covariates, and 5 years follow-up survival were included. Latent Class Analysis (LCA) identified three classes based on patterns of MCC, medications, and demographic covariates: Low-comorbidity (16%), High-longevity (55%), and High-comorbidity (29%). Overall, survival censored at 5 years post-op averaged 717days. The Low-comorbidity group was more likely to be Hispanic, less disabled per VHA determination of eligibility for care, with less risk of postoperative emergency department (ED) visit, and taking no prescription medications. The High-longevity group had longer survival. The High-comorbidity group had more MCC, more prescription medications and shorter survival than the other two groups. Accelerated failure time (AFT) modeled associations between MCC and 5-year survival by class. In AFT models, fewer days until first postoperative ED visit was significantly associated with survival across the three classes. About one in male hip fractured veteran patients over the age of 85 had high levels of MCC and ED use and experienced shorter survival. Hip fracture patients with MCC may merit enhanced post-discharge management. Close investigation targeted to MCC and hip fractures is needed to optimize clinical practices for oldest-old patients in community healthcare systems as well as VHA.

Comparison of Environmental MRSA Levels on High-Touch Surfaces in Contact Isolation and Noncontact Isolation Patient Rooms.

Environmental samples were collected from 100 hospital rooms, 32 noncontact rooms, and 68 contact isolation rooms. We isolated 202 and 1,830 MRSA colonies in noncontact and contact isolation rooms, respectively. The study identified MRSA isolates in hospital rooms of patients without colonization or infection with MRSA. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2015;36(12):1472-1475.

Is the pulsed xenon ultraviolet light no-touch disinfection system effective on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in the absence of manual cleaning?

BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has been shown to survive on ambient surfaces for extended periods of time. Leftover MRSA environmental contamination in a hospital room places future patients at risk. Manual disinfection supplemented by pulsed xenon ultraviolet (PX-UV) light disinfection has been shown to greatly decrease the MRSA bioburden in hospital rooms. However, the effect of PX-UV in the absence of manual disinfection has not been evaluated. METHODS: Rooms that were previously occupied by a MRSA-positive patient (current colonization or infection) were selected for the study immediately postdischarge. Five high-touch surfaces were sampled, before and after PX-UV disinfection, in each hospital room. The effectiveness of the PX-UV device on the concentration of MRSA was assessed employing a Wilcoxon signed-rank test for all 70 samples with MRSA in 14 rooms, as well as by surface location. RESULTS: The final analysis included 14 rooms. Before PX-UV disinfection there were a total of 393 MRSA colonies isolated from the 5 high-touch surfaces. There were 100 MRSA colonies after disinfection by the PX-UV device and the overall reduction was statistically significant (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Our study results suggest that PX-UV light effectively reduces MRSA colony counts in the absence of manual disinfection. These findings are important for hospital and environmental services supervisors who plan to adapt new technologies as an adjunct to routine manual disinfection.

Can pulsed xenon ultraviolet light systems disinfect aerobic bacteria in the absence of manual disinfection?

Whereas pulsed xenon-based ultraviolet light no-touch disinfection systems are being increasingly used for room disinfection after patient discharge with manual cleaning, their effectiveness in the absence of manual disinfection has not been previously evaluated. Our study indicates that pulsed xenon-based ultraviolet light systems effectively reduce aerobic bacteria in the absence of manual disinfection. These data are important for hospitals planning to adopt this technology as adjunct to routine manual disinfection.