Home-based initiatives for acute management of COVID-19 patients needing oxygen: differences across The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: During the COVID-19 pandemic new collaborative-care initiatives were developed for treating and monitoring COVID-19 patients with oxygen at home. Aim was to provide a structured overview focused on differences and similarities of initiatives of acute home-based management in the Netherlands. METHODS: Initiatives were eligible for evaluation if (i) COVID-19 patients received oxygen treatment at home; (ii) patients received structured remote monitoring; (iii) it was not an 'early hospital discharge' program; (iv) at least one patient was included. Protocols were screened, and additional information was obtained from involved physicians. Design choices were categorised into: eligible patient group, organization medical care, remote monitoring, nursing care, and devices used. RESULTS: Nine initiatives were screened for eligibility; five were included. Three initiatives included low-risk patients and two were designed specifically for frail patients. Emergency department (ED) visit for an initial diagnostic work-up and evaluation was mandatory in three initiatives before starting home management. Medical responsibility was either assigned to the general practitioner or hospital specialist, most often pulmonologist or internist. Pulse-oximetry was used in all initiatives, with additional monitoring of heart rate and respiratory rate in three initiatives. Remote monitoring staff's qualification and authority varied, and organization and logistics were covered by persons with various backgrounds. All initiatives offered remote monitoring via an application, two also offered a paper diary option. CONCLUSIONS: We observed differences in the organization of interprofessional collaboration for acute home management of hypoxemic COVID-19 patients. All initiatives used pulse-oximetry and an app for remote monitoring. Our overview may be of help to healthcare providers and organizations to set up and implement similar acute home management initiatives for critical episodes of COVID-19 (or other acute disorders) that would otherwise require hospital care.

Effect of interprofessional and intraprofessional clinical collaboration on patient related outcomes in multimorbid older patients - a retrospective cohort study on the Intensive Collaboration Ward.

BACKGROUND: The management and care of older patients with multiple health problems is demanding and complex. Interprofessional and intraprofessional collaboration has the potential to improve both the efficiency and the quality of care for these patients. However, it has proven difficult to demonstrate the efficacy of this approach in terms of objective patient-related outcomes. Recently, a care model with interprofessional and intraprofessional care was started, the Intensive Collaboration Ward (ICW). This ward combines interprofessional care and intraprofessional care for older patients with multiple health problems. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of ICW care in older patients with multiple health problems. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study evaluated the effects on patients outcomes. This was done by comparing patients of the new model, the ICW (ICW group), to a historical cohort of comparable patients who would have been eligible for the ICW (control group). Outcomes were medical consultations, allied health professional consultations, radiological procedures, waiting time for radiological procedures, change in primary treating specialty, length of hospital stay, readmission rate, and mortality rate. Linear and logistic regression analyses were performed, adjusted for baseline differences. RESULTS: The ICW group required significantly fewer medical consultations than the control group. Calls to specialists from the emergency room decreased significantly, but there was no change in in-person consultations on the ER. 51% of control patients had ≥ 1 in-hospital consultation compared to 21% of ICW patients (p < 0.05). Patients in the ICW group received significantly more consultations with allied health professionals and more often had a change in primary treating specialty. CONCLUSIONS: Interprofessional and intraprofessional clinical collaboration on the ICW reduced in-hospital consultations and increased allied health professionals' consultations. This approach may decrease fragmentation of care and provide more integrated, efficient and patient centered care. This may improve the overall care of older patients with multiple health problems.

First Case of Human Brucella canis Infection in the Netherlands.

A patient was diagnosed with Brucella canis following exposure to infected dogs in her breeding facility. Transboundary spread of B. canis through (illegal) import of infected dogs to non-endemic countries in Europe suggest that B. canis infection should be considered in European patients with occupational exposure to dogs.

Prior use of therapeutic anticoagulation does not protect against COVID-19 related clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients: A propensity score-matched cohort study.

The hypercoagulable state observed in COVID-19 could be responsible for morbidity and mortality. In this retrospective study we investigated whether therapeutic anticoagulation prior to infection has a beneficial effect in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. This study included 1154 COVID-19 patients admitted to 6 hospitals in the Netherlands between March and May 2020. We applied 1:3 propensity score matching to evaluate the association between prior therapeutic anticoagulation use and clinical outcome, with in hospital mortality as primary endpoint. In total, 190 (16%) patients used therapeutic anticoagulation prior to admission. In the propensity score matched analyses, we observed no associations between prior use of therapeutic anticoagulation and overall mortality (risk ratio 1.02 [95% confidence interval; 0.80-1.30]) or length of hospital stay (7.0 [4-12] vs. 7.0 [4-12] days, P = .69), although we observed a lower risk of pulmonary embolism (0.19 [0.05-0.80]). This study shows that prior use of therapeutic anticoagulation is not associated with improved clinical outcome in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Risk factors for in-hospital mortality in laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands: A competing risk survival analysis.

BACKGROUND: To date, survival data on risk factors for COVID-19 mortality in western Europe is limited, and none of the published survival studies have used a competing risk approach. This study aims to identify risk factors for in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands, considering recovery as a competing risk. METHODS: In this observational multicenter cohort study we included adults with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection that were admitted to one of five hospitals in the Netherlands (March to May 2020). We performed a competing risk survival analysis, presenting cause-specific hazard ratios (HRCS) for the effect of preselected factors on the absolute risk of death and recovery. RESULTS: 1,006 patients were included (63.9% male; median age 69 years, IQR: 58-77). Patients were hospitalized for a median duration of 6 days (IQR: 3-13); 243 (24.6%) of them died, 689 (69.9%) recovered, and 74 (7.4%) were censored. Patients with higher age (HRCS 1.10, 95% CI 1.08-1.12), immunocompromised state (HRCS 1.46, 95% CI 1.08-1.98), who used anticoagulants or antiplatelet medication (HRCS 1.38, 95% CI 1.01-1.88), with higher modified early warning score (MEWS) (HRCS 1.09, 95% CI 1.01-1.18), and higher blood LDH at time of admission (HRCS 6.68, 95% CI 1.95-22.8) had increased risk of death, whereas fever (HRCS 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.95) decreased risk of death. We found no increased mortality risk in male patients, high BMI or diabetes. CONCLUSION: Our competing risk survival analysis confirms specific risk factors for COVID-19 mortality in a the Netherlands, which can be used for prediction research, more intense in-hospital monitoring or prioritizing particular patients for new treatments or vaccination.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of 952 hospitalized COVID-19 patients in The Netherlands: A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe clinical characteristics, disease course and outcomes in a large and well-documented cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre retrospective cohort study in The Netherlands including 952 of 1183 consecutively hospitalized patients that were admitted to participating hospitals between March 2nd, 2020, and May 22nd, 2020. Clinical characteristics and laboratory parameters upon admission and during hospitalization were collected until July 1st. RESULTS: The median age was 69 years (IQR 58-77 years) and 605 (63.6%) were male. Cardiovascular disease was present in 558 (58.6%) patients. The median time of onset of symptoms prior to hospitalization was 7 days (IQR 5-10). A non ICU admission policy was applicable in 312 (32.8%) patients and in 165 (56.3%) of the severely ill patients admitted to the ward. At admission and during hospitalization, severely ill patients had higher values of CRP, LDH, ferritin and D-dimer with higher neutrophil counts and lower lymphocyte counts. Overall in-hospital mortality was 25.1% and 183 (19.1%) patients were admitted to ICU, of whom 56 (30.6%) died. Patients aged ≥70 years had high mortality, both at the ward (52.4%) and ICU (47.4%). The median length of ICU stay was 8 days longer in patients aged ≥70 years compared to patients aged ≤60 years. CONCLUSION: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients aged ≥70 years had high mortality and longer ICU stay compared to patients aged ≤60 years. These findings in combination with the patient burden of an ICU admission and possible long term complications after discharge should encourage us to further investigate the benefit of ICU admission in elderly and fragile COVID-19-patients.

Community-acquired bacteraemia in COVID-19 in comparison to influenza A and influenza B: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the Netherlands it was noticed that very few blood cultures from COVID-19 patients turned positive with clinically relevant bacteria. This was particularly evident in comparison to the number of positive blood cultures during previous seasonal epidemics of influenza. This observation raised questions about the occurrence and causative microorganisms of bacteraemia in COVID-19 patients, especially in the perspective of the widely reported overuse of antibiotics and the rising rate of antibiotic resistance. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study on blood culture results in influenza A, influenza B and COVID-19 patients presenting to two hospitals in the Netherlands. Our main outcome consisted of the percentage of positive blood cultures. The percentage of clinically relevant blood cultures, isolated bacteria and 30-day all-cause mortality served as our secondary outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1331 viral episodes were analysed in 1324 patients. There was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.47) in overall occurrence of blood culture positivity in COVID-19 patients (9.0, 95% CI 6.8-11.1) in comparison to influenza A (11.4, 95% CI 7.9-14.8) and influenza B patients (10.4, 95% CI 7.1-13.7,). After correcting for the high rate of contamination, the occurrence of clinically relevant bacteraemia in COVID-19 patients amounted to 1.0% (95% CI 0.3-1.8), which was statistically significantly lower (p = 0.04) compared to influenza A patients (4.0, 95% CI 1.9-6.1) and influenza B patients (3.0, 95% CI 1.2-4.9). The most frequently identified bacterial isolates in COVID-19 patients were Escherichia coli (n = 2) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (n = 2). The overall 30-day all-cause mortality for COVID-19 patients was 28.3% (95% CI 24.9-31.7), which was statistically significantly higher (p = <.001) when compared to patients with influenza A (7.1, 95% CI 4.3-9.9) and patients with influenza B (6.4, 95% CI 3.8-9.1). CONCLUSIONS: We report a very low occurrence of community-acquired bacteraemia amongst COVID-19 patients in comparison to influenza patients. These results reinforce current clinical guidelines on antibiotic management in COVID-19, which only advise utilization of antibiotics when a bacterial co-infection is suspected.

Dysregulated Innate and Adaptive Immune Responses Discriminate Disease Severity in COVID-19.

The clinical spectrum of COVID-19 varies and the differences in host response characterizing this variation have not been fully elucidated. COVID-19 disease severity correlates with an excessive proinflammatory immune response and profound lymphopenia. Inflammatory responses according to disease severity were explored by plasma cytokine measurements and proteomics analysis in 147 COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, peripheral blood mononuclear cell cytokine production assays and whole blood flow cytometry were performed. Results confirm a hyperinflammatory innate immune state, while highlighting hepatocyte growth factor and stem cell factor as potential biomarkers for disease severity. Clustering analysis revealed no specific inflammatory endotypes in COVID-19 patients. Functional assays revealed abrogated adaptive cytokine production (interferon-γ, interleukin-17, and interleukin-22) and prominent T-cell exhaustion in critically ill patients, whereas innate immune responses were intact or hyperresponsive. Collectively, this extensive analysis provides a comprehensive insight into the pathobiology of severe to critical COVID-19 and highlights potential biomarkers of disease severity.

Few bacterial co-infections but frequent empiric antibiotic use in the early phase of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: results from a multicentre retrospective cohort study in The Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge on bacterial co-infections in COVID-19 is crucial to use antibiotics appropriately. Therefore, we aimed to determine the incidence of bacterial co-infections, antibiotic use and application of antimicrobial stewardship principles in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational study in four hospitals (1 university, 2 non-university teaching, 1 non-teaching hospital) in the Netherlands from March to May 2020 including consecutive patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19. Data on first microbiological investigations obtained at the discretion of the physician and antibiotic use in the first week of hospital admission were collected. RESULTS: Twelve (1.2%) of the 925 patients included had a documented bacterial co-infection (75.0% pneumonia) within the first week. Microbiological testing was performed in 749 (81%) patients: sputum cultures in 105 (11.4%), blood cultures in 711 (76.9%), pneumococcal urinary antigen testing in 202 (21.8%), and Legionella urinary antigen testing in 199 (21.5%) patients, with clear variation between hospitals. On presentation 556 (60.1%; range 33.3-73.4%) patients received antibiotics for a median duration of 2 days (IQR 1-4). Intravenous to oral switch was performed in 41 of 413 (9.9%) patients who received intravenous treatment >48 h. Mean adherence to the local guideline on empiric antibiotic therapy on day 1 was on average 60.3% (range 45.3%-74.7%). CONCLUSIONS: On presentation to the hospital bacterial co-infections are rare, while empiric antibiotic use is abundant. This implies that in patients with COVID-19 empiric antibiotic should be withheld. This has the potential to dramatically reduce the current overuse of antibiotics in the COVID-19 pandemic.

[Fatal pneumonia caused by carbapenem resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae]. / Fatale pneumonie door carbapenemresistente Klebsiella pneumoniae.

A 63-year-old Dutch man became colonized with a carbapenem resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae during a period of hospitalization in India. His recovery in the Netherlands was complicated by pneumonia due to this difficult-to-control multiresistant bacteria to which he eventually succumbed. Carbapenem resistance in Enterobacteriaceae, such as K. pneumoniae, is usually caused by carbapenemase (a betalactamase) production. Carbapenemase producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) are spreading throughout the world and cause difficult-to-treat infections that are associated with high mortality. This case report illustrates the clinical challenges associated with infection with these multiresistant Enterobacteriaceae. In the Netherlands, there are no guidelines for detection of CPE and carbapenemase production can frequently go undetected in clinical microbiology laboratories. As a consequence, adequate treatment of CPE infections and infection control measures to prevent the spread of CPE can be delayed. Expeditious development and implementation of existing Dutch draft guidelines for detection methods of CPE is therefore warranted.