Outpatient treatment with concomitant vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma for patients with immunosuppression and COVID-19.

Although severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and hospitalization associated with COVID-19 are generally preventable among healthy vaccine recipients, patients with immunosuppression have poor immunogenic responses to COVID-19 vaccines and remain at high risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and hospitalization. In addition, monoclonal antibody therapy is limited by the emergence of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants that have serially escaped neutralization. In this context, there is interest in understanding the clinical benefit associated with COVID-19 convalescent plasma collected from persons who have been both naturally infected with SARS-CoV-2 and vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 ("vax-plasma"). Thus, we report the clinical outcome of 386 immunocompromised outpatients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 and who received contemporary COVID-19-specific therapeutics (standard-of-care group) and a subgroup who also received concomitant treatment with very high titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma (vax-plasma group) with a specific focus on hospitalization rates. The overall hospitalization rate was 2.2% (5 of 225 patients) in the vax-plasma group and 6.2% (10 of 161 patients) in the standard-of-care group, which corresponded to a relative risk reduction of 65% (P = 0.046). Evidence of efficacy in nonvaccinated patients cannot be inferred from these data because 94% (361 of 386 patients) of patients were vaccinated. In vaccinated patients with immunosuppression and COVID-19, the addition of vax-plasma or very high titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma to COVID-19-specific therapies reduced the risk of disease progression leading to hospitalization.IMPORTANCEAs SARS-CoV-2 evolves, new variants of concern (VOCs) have emerged that evade available anti-spike monoclonal antibodies, particularly among immunosuppressed patients. However, high-titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma continues to be effective against VOCs because of its broad-spectrum immunomodulatory properties. Thus, we report clinical outcomes of 386 immunocompromised outpatients who were treated with COVID-19-specific therapeutics and a subgroup also treated with vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma. We found that the administration of vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma was associated with a significantly decreased incidence of hospitalization among immunocompromised COVID-19 outpatients. Our data add to the contemporary data providing evidence to support the clinical utility of high-titer convalescent plasma as antibody replacement therapy in immunocompromised patients.

Comparable outcomes of outpatient remdesivir and sotrovimab among high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 during the omicron BA.1 surge.

Studies conducted prior to SARS-CoV-2 Omicron demonstrated that sotrovimab and remdesivir reduced hospitalization among high-risk outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. However, their effectiveness has not been directly compared. This study examined all high-risk outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19 who received either remdesivir or sotrovimab at Mayo Clinic during the Omicron BA.1 surge from January to March 2022. COVID-19-related hospitalization or death within 28 days were compared between the two treatment groups. Among 3257 patients, 2158 received sotrovimab and 1099 received remdesivir. Patients treated with sotrovimab were younger and had lower comorbidity but were more likely to be immunocompromised than remdesivir-treated patients. The majority (89%) had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. COVID-19-related hospitalization (1.5% and 1.0% in remdesivir and sotrovimab, respectively, p = .15) and mortality within 28 days (0.4% in both groups, p = .82) were similarly low. A propensity score weighted analysis demonstrated no significant difference in the outcomes between the two groups. We demonstrated favorable outcomes that were not significantly different between patients treated with remdesivir or sotrovimab.

A Pragmatic Study of Cardiovascular Disease During Long-Term COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Many patients diagnosed with COVID-19 have persistent cardiovascular symptoms, but whether this represents a true cardiac process is unclear. This study assessed whether symptoms associated with long COVID among patients referred for cardiovascular evaluation are associated with objective abnormalities on cardiac testing to explain their clinical presentation. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 40,462 unique patients diagnosed with COVID-19 at our tertiary referral was conducted and identified 363 patients with persistent cardiovascular symptoms a minimum of 4 weeks after polymerase chain reaction confirmed COVID-19 infection. Patients had no cardiovascular symptoms prior to COVID-19 infection. Each patient was referred for cardiovascular evaluation at a tertiary referral center. The incidence and etiology of abnormalities on cardiovascular testing among patients with long COVID symptoms are reported here. The cohort was subsequently divided into 3 categories based on the dominant circulating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variant at the time of initial infection for further analysis. RESULTS: Among 40,462 unique patients diagnosed with COVID-19 at our tertiary referral center from April 2020 to March 2022, 363 (0.9%) patients with long COVID were evaluated by Cardiology for possible cardiac sequelae from COVID and formed the main study cohort. Of these, 229 (63%) were vaccinated and 47 (12.9%) had severe initial infection, receiving inpatient treatment for COVID prior to developing long COVID symptoms. Symptoms were associated with a cardiac cause in 85 (23.4%), of which 52 (14.3%) were attributed to COVID; 39 (10.7%) with new cardiac disease from COVID, and 13 (3.6%) to worsening of pre-existing cardiac disease after COVID infection. The median troponin change in 45 patients with troponin measurements within 4 weeks of acute infection was +4 ng/dL (9 to 13 ng/dL). Among the total cohort with long COVID, 83.7% were diagnosed during the pre-Delta phase, 13.2% during the Delta phase, and 3.1% during the Omicron phase of the pandemic. There were 6 cases of myocarditis, 11 rhythm disorders, 8 cases of pericarditis, 5 suspected cases of endothelial dysfunction, and 33 cases of autonomic dysfunction. CONCLUSION: This pragmatic retrospective cohort study suggests that patients with long COVID referred for cardiovascular evaluation infrequently have new, objective cardiovascular disease to explain their clinical presentation. A multidisciplinary, patient-centered approach is warranted for symptom management along with conservative use of diagnostic testing.

Symptom presentation by phenotype of postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome.

Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) presents heterogeneously and is diagnosed when appropriate symptoms are present in conjunction with a heart rate increase of at least 30 beats-per-minute upon standing without orthostatic hypotension. Much of the current understanding of POTS is based on clinical expertise, particularly regarding POTS phenotypes and their potential role in targeting pharmacologic treatment. This study describes the symptom presentation of POTS by phenotypes at a subspecialty POTS clinic. Data was collected prospectively during clinical visits between April 17, 2014 and February 8, 2021. This data was abstracted retrospectively by chart review. Most of the 378 study participants were female (89.9%) with a mean age 23.0 ± 4.9 years. Lightheadedness was the most common (97.6%) symptom and the most disruptive of quality of life (29.9%). Patients reported substantial functional impairment across multiple life domains, with 3.0 ± 2.8 days lost and 4.7 ± 2.3 unproductive days per week. There were no differences in symptom presentation among POTS phenotypes. POTS phenotypes are not distinguishable based on symptoms alone; if phenotyping is sought, testing is necessary. Further research is needed in better classifying POTS phenotypes with the potential goal of tailoring treatment.

Complementary and alternative medicine for long COVID: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Background: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) interventions are growing in popularity as possible treatments for long COVID symptoms. However, comprehensive analysis of current evidence in this setting is still lacking. Objective: This study aims to review existing published studies on the use of CAM interventions for patients experiencing long COVID through a systematic review. Design: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: A comprehensive electronic literature search was performed in multiple databases and clinical trial registries from September 2019 to January 2023. RCTs evaluating efficacy and safety of CAM for long COVID were included. Methodological quality of each included trial was appraised with the Cochrane 'risk of bias' tool. A qualitative analysis was conducted due to heterogeneity of included studies. Results: A total of 14 RCTs with 1195 participants were included in this review. Study findings demonstrated that CAM interventions could benefit patients with long COVID, especially those suffering from neuropsychiatric disorders, olfactory dysfunction, cognitive impairment, fatigue, breathlessness, and mild-to-moderate lung fibrosis. The main interventions reported were self-administered transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation, neuro-meditation, dietary supplements, olfactory training, aromatherapy, inspiratory muscle training, concurrent training, and an online breathing and well-being program. Conclusion: CAM interventions may be effective, safe, and acceptable to patients with symptoms of long COVID. However, the findings from this systematic review should be interpreted with caution due to various methodological limitations. More rigorous trials focused on CAM for long COVID are warranted in the future.

Rates Among Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 Treated With Convalescent Plasma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: To examine the association of COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion with mortality and the differences between subgroups in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Patients and Methods: On October 26, 2022, a systematic search was performed for clinical studies of COVID-19 convalescent plasma in the literature from January 1, 2020, to October 26, 2022. Randomized clinical trials and matched cohort studies investigating COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion compared with standard of care treatment or placebo among hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 were included. The electronic search yielded 3841 unique records, of which 744 were considered for full-text screening. The selection process was performed independently by a panel of 5 reviewers. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data were extracted by 5 independent reviewers in duplicate and pooled using an inverse-variance random effects model. The prespecified end point was all-cause mortality during hospitalization. Results: Thirty-nine randomized clinical trials enrolling 21,529 participants and 70 matched cohort studies enrolling 50,160 participants were included in the systematic review. Separate meta-analyses reported that transfusion of COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the control cohort for both randomized clinical trials (odds ratio [OR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-1.00) and matched cohort studies (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.88). The meta-analysis of subgroups revealed 2 important findings. First, treatment with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with convalescent plasma containing low antibody levels (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.99). Second, earlier treatment with COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the later treatment cohort (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.82). Conclusion: During COVID-19 convalescent plasma use was associated with a 13% reduced risk of mortality, implying a mortality benefit for hospitalized patients with COVID-19, particularly those treated with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels treated earlier in the disease course.

Diagnosis and Management of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is a chronic neurologic disease often preceded by infection. There has been increased interest in ME/CFS recently because of its significant overlap with the post-COVID syndrome (long COVID or post-acute sequelae of COVID), with several studies estimating that half of patients with post-COVID syndrome fulfill ME/CFS criteria. Our concise review describes a generalist approach to ME/CFS, including diagnosis, evaluation, and management strategies.

Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders.

Functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) are an extremely common set of more than 50 disorders characterized by persistent and recurring gastrointestinal symptoms. Most of these patients can be diagnosed and managed by primary care physicians. Treatment includes patient education and reassurance, eliminating triggers, dietary modification, and pharmacologic management. Primary care physicians should consider referral to gastroenterologists when patients exhibit red flag symptoms such as blood in stool, abnormal laboratory findings, involuntary weight loss, age of presentation greater than 50 years, or certain concerning family history.

Potential reduction of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 symptoms via vaccination.

The objective of this observational study is to determine whether vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 alters the clinical presentation of post-COVID conditions (PCC). Self-reported data provided by patients requesting care for PCC at the Mayo Clinic were analyzed to assess for a relationship between vaccination status prior to COVID infection and PCC symptoms. In all, 477 subjects were included in this study. In total, 245 (51.4%) were vaccinated. Vaccinated subjects with PCC reported less abdominal pain, anosmia, parosmia, chest pain/tightness, dizziness, numbness/tingling, dyspnea, spells/tremors, and weakness. For hospitalized patients who developed PCC, vaccinated patients reported less chest pain, cough, dizziness, and dyspnea. After applying Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons, decreased abdominal pain remained significant. We conclude that vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 may reduce the symptoms of PCC, leading to improved morbidity and function. Further studies on the impact of vaccination on PCC and recovery are needed.

Risk factors for post-acute sequelae of COVID-19: Survey results from a tertiary care hospital.

Identifying risk factors for post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) is important. We conducted a multicenter cross-sectional survey study to define and characterize risk factors for severe COVID-19 in adults (≥18 years) treated at our virtual COVID-19 clinic from March 1, 2020, through March 31, 2021. We assessed patient demographics, symptom types, and persistence, incidence of PASC, and COVID-19-caused hospitalizations. Surveyed patients were also asked to rate their perception of the severity of their acute COVID-19 symptoms. Continuous variables were summarized descriptively. Differences among groups categorized by acute COVID-19 symptom severity level (mild/very mild, moderate, and severe/very severe) were evaluated with the Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test for continuous measures and the Pearson χ2 test for categorical measures. A total of 3094 adults completed the survey. More respondents with severe/very severe acute COVID-19 symptoms reported having PASC than did those with mild/very mild and moderate acute symptoms. A significantly greater proportion of respondents with PASC were women (68.4% vs 56.7%, p < 0.001), had been hospitalized (12.2% vs 4.4%, p < 0.001), reported having negative psychological COVID-19-related repercussions (39.9% vs 15.3%, p < 0.001), and required more than 1 month to resume normal activities (38.8% vs 12.9%, p < 0.001) than did those without PASC. These findings may improve our understanding of PASC and provide a framework for early recognition of and intervention for patients at higher risk for PASC. Further research is needed to understand the predictors of persistent symptoms after acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and the risk of PASC.

Post-COVID Conditions.

Postinfectious syndromes have been described since the Spanish influenza pandemic of 1918. A similar syndrome-post-COVID condition (PCC)-is common; it occurs months after COVID-19 infection and involves fatigue, postexertional malaise, dyspnea, memory loss, diffuse pain, and orthostasis. The medical, psychosocial, and economic impact of PCC is immense. In the United States, PCC has caused widespread unemployment and billions in lost wages. Risk factors for development of PCC are female sex and severity of acute COVID-19 infection. Proposed pathophysiologic mechanisms include central nervous system inflammation, viral reservoirs, persistent spike protein, cell receptor dysregulation, and autoimmunity. Because presenting symptoms are often vague, the approach to evaluation should be comprehensive with consideration of other diseases that could masquerade as PCC. Treatments of PCC are little researched, are largely expert based, and are likely to evolve as more evidence emerges. Current therapies, which are symptom targeted, include medications and nonpharmacologic therapies such as optimizing fluid intake, compression garments, progressive activity, meditation, biofeedback, cognitive rehabilitation, and addressing concomitant mood disorders. Many patients will enjoy significant improvements in their quality of life with multimodal treatments and longitudinal care.

Inflammatory Arthritis After COVID-19: A Case Series.

BACKGROUND Some patients who have recovered from acute infection with SARS-CoV-2 develop persistent symptoms that have been termed post-COVID syndrome (PoCoS). PoCoS can affect the musculoskeletal system, with arthralgia and myalgia being common. Preliminary evidence suggests that PoCoS is an immune-mediated condition that not only predisposes but also precipitates pre-existing inflammatory joint diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and reactive arthritis. Here, we describe a series of patients who presented to our Post-COVID Clinic and were found to have inflammatory arthritis (reactive and rheumatoid arthritis). CASE REPORT We present 5 patients who developed joint pain several weeks after recovery from acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. These patients were seen in our Post-COVID Clinic and came from locations across the United States. All 5 patients were women, with age of diagnosis of COVID-19 disease between 19 and 61 years (mean 37.8 years). All patients presented with joint pain as the primary concern to the Post-COVID Clinic. Abnormal joint imaging was present in all patients. Treatments varied and included non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, corticosteroids, immunomodulators (golimumab), methotrexate, leflunomide, and hydroxychloroquine. CONCLUSIONS COVID-19 disease is a potential cause of inflammatory arthritis, with both rheumatoid arthritis and reactive arthritis demonstrated in our PoCoS population. Care must be taken to identify these conditions, as there are treatment ramifications.

Perioperative cardiac risk reduction in non cardiac surgery.

For patients undergoing nonemergent noncardiac surgery, care must be taken to identify patients at increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, as these remain a significant source of perioperative morbidity and mortality. Identification of at-risk patients requires careful attention to risk factors including assessment of functional status, medical comorbidities, and a medication assessment. After identification, to minimize perioperative cardiac risk, care should be taken through a combination of appropriate medication management, close monitoring for cardiovascular ischemic events, and optimization of pre-existing medical conditions. There are multiple society guidelines that aim to mitigate risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing nonemergent noncardiac surgery. However, the rapid evolution of medical literature often creates gaps between the existing evidence and best practice recommendations. In this review, we aim to reconcile the recommendations made in the guidelines from the major cardiovascular and anesthesiology societies from the USA, Canada, and Europe, and to provide updated recommendations based on new evidence.

Cardiopulmonary testing in long COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 patients with undifferentiated Dyspnea on exertion.

BACKGROUND: Dyspnea and fatigue are characteristics of long SARS-CoV-2 (COVID)-19. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) can be used to better evaluate such patients. RESEARCH QUESTION: How significantly and by what mechanisms is exercise capacity impaired in patients with long COVID who are coming to a specialized clinic for evaluation? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed a cohort study using the Mayo Clinic exercise testing database. Subjects included consecutive long COVID patients without prior history of heart or lung disease sent from the Post-COVID Care Clinic for CPET. They were compared to a historical group of non-COVID patients with undifferentiated dyspnea also without known cardiac or pulmonary disease. Statistical comparisons were performed by t-test or Pearson's chi2 test controlling for age, sex, and beta blocker use where appropriate. RESULTS: We found 77 patients with long COVID and 766 control patients. Long COVID patients were younger (47 ± 15 vs 50 ± 10 years, P < .01) and more likely female (70% vs 58%, P < .01). The most prominent difference on CPETs was lower percent predicted peak V̇O2 (73 ± 18 vs 85 ± 23%, p < .0001). Autonomic abnormalities (resting tachycardia, CNS changes, low systolic blood pressure) were seen during CPET more commonly in long COVID patients (34 vs 23%, P < .04), while mild pulmonary abnormalities (mild desaturation, limited breathing reserve, elevated V̇E/V̇CO2) during CPET were similar (19% in both groups) with only 1 long COVID patient showing severe impairment. INTERPRETATION: We identified severe exercise limitation among long COVID patients. Young women may be at higher risk for these complications. Though mild pulmonary and autonomic impairment were common in long COVID patients, marked limitations were uncommon. We hope our observations help to untangle the physiologic abnormalities responsible for the symptomatology of long COVID.

Estradiol and Dihydrotestosterone Levels in COVID-19 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To determine differences in plasma sex hormone levels in male and female coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients and healthy volunteers (HVs) because cell entry of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 occurs via the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor which is downregulated by 17ß-estradiol. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Citrated plasma samples were collected from 101 patients with COVID-19 upon presentation to the emergency department and from 40 HVs between November 1, 2020, and May 30, 2021. Plasma 17ß-estradiol and 5α-dihydrotestosterone (DHT) levels were measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (pg/mL). Data are presented as median and quartiles (IQR). Wilcoxon rank sum test with a P value less than .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Patients with COVID-19 (median age, 49 years) included 51 males and 50 females (25 postmenopausal). Hospital admission was required for 58.8% of male patients (n = 30) and 48.0% of female patients (n = 24) (66.7% postmenopausal, n = 16) Healthy volunteers (median age, 41 years) included 20 males and 20 females (9 postmenopausal). Female patients with COVID-19 were found to have decreased 17ß-estradiol levels (18.5 [IQR, 10.5-32.3] pg/mL; 41.4 [IQR, 15.5-111.0] pg/mL, P=.025), and lower 17ß-estradiol to DHT ratios (0.073 [IQR, 0.052-0.159] pg/mL; 0.207 [IQR, 0.104-0.538] pg/mL, P=.015) than female HVs. Male patients with COVID-19 were found to have decreased DHT levels (302.8 [IQR, 249.9-470.8] pg/mL; 457.2 [IQR, 368.7-844.3] pg/mL, P=.005), compared with male HVs. Levels of DHT did not differ between female patients with COVID-19 and female HVs, whereas 17ß-estradiol levels did not differ between male patients with COVID-19 and male HVs. CONCLUSION: Sex hormone levels differ between patients with COVID-19 and HVs, with sex-specific patterns of hypogonadism in males and females. These alterations may be associated with disease development and severity.

COVID-19, the Gut, and Nutritional Implications.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Our goal is to provide the most recent and accurate scientific evidence available regarding COVID-19's interaction with the human gut and the role of nutrition/nutritional supplementation in the prevention and treatment of the disease. RECENT FINDINGS: Gastrointestinal symptoms of COVID-19 are common and often persist even after classically defined illness resolution. Nutritional status and content have been shown to impact infection risk and severity. Well-balanced diets are associated with decreased infection risk/severity, and early nutrition is associated with better outcomes in the critically ill. No specific vitamin supplementation regimen has shown consistent benefit for infection treatment or prevention. The impact of COVID-19 extends far past the pulmonary system, and its impact on the gut should not be ignored. For those interested in adopting lifestyle modifications to prevent severe COVID-19 infection/side effects, consideration should be made for adoption of a well-balanced diet (e.g., Mediterranean style), utilization of probiotics, and addressing nutritional/vitamin deficiencies. Future, high-quality research is needed in this arena.

Mindfulness Using a Wearable Brain Sensing Device for Health Care Professionals During a Pandemic: A Pilot Program.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this feasibility pilot study was to evaluate safety and adherence of a wearable brain sensing wellness device designed to reduce stress among healthcare professionals (HCP). METHODS: A total of 40 HCP were invited to participate in an open-label pilot study. Participants were asked to use a brain sensing wearable device (MUSE-S™) on a daily basis to reduce their stress, for a total of 90 days. Total study participation duration was 180 days. Study enrollment began in August 2021 and ended December 2021. The exploratory outcomes included stress, depression, sleep, burn-out, resilience, quality of life, and cognition. RESULTS: Among the 40 HCP in study, the majority were female (85%), white (87.5%) and with an average age of 41.3 ± 11.0 years (SD). Participants used the wearable device an average of 23.8 times over a 30-day period with a mean duration of 5.8 min with each use. Study results demonstrate the positive impact of guided mindfulness using the wearable device MUSE-S™ and its accompanying application (APP). A statistically significant improvement was found for a reduction in stress (P < .001) and improvement in resilience (P = .02), quality of life (P = .003), and cognition (P < .001). The majority (91.9%) of the participants indicated they felt more relaxed after using the device, and 73% indicated they would continue to use this device at end-of-study. No adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSION: Study results show that 3 to 10 min of guided meditation during work hours through the use of a brain sensing wearable device is safe and acceptable, with associated health benefits for HCP.

Association of Neutralizing Antispike Monoclonal Antibody Treatment With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Hospitalization and Assessment of the Monoclonal Antibody Screening Score.

Objective: To test the hypothesis that the Monoclonal Antibody Screening Score performs consistently better in identifying the need for monoclonal antibody infusion throughout each "wave" of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant predominance during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and that the infusion of contemporary monoclonal antibody treatments is associated with a lower risk of hospitalization. Patients and Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we evaluated the efficacy of monoclonal antibody treatment compared with that of no monoclonal antibody treatment in symptomatic adults who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 regardless of their risk factors for disease progression or vaccination status during different periods of SARS-CoV-2 variant predominance. The primary outcome was hospitalization within 28 days after COVID-19 diagnosis. The study was conducted on patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 from November 19, 2020, through May 12, 2022. Results: Of the included 118,936 eligible patients, hospitalization within 28 days of COVID-19 diagnosis occurred in 2.52% (456/18,090) of patients who received monoclonal antibody treatment and 6.98% (7,037/100,846) of patients who did not. Treatment with monoclonal antibody therapies was associated with a lower risk of hospitalization when using stratified data analytics, propensity scoring, and regression and machine learning models with and without adjustments for putative confounding variables, such as advanced age and coexisting medical conditions (eg, relative risk, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.14-0.17). Conclusion: Among patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, including those who have been vaccinated, monoclonal antibody treatment was associated with a lower risk of hospital admission during each wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Stress Resilience Program for Health Care Professionals During a Pandemic: A Pilot Program.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to increased burnout and staff turnover for health care providers (HCPs). The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate the safety and acceptability of a Stress Resilience Program (SRP) for reducing perceived stress and improving resilience among HCPs during a pandemic. METHOD: Of the 12 HCPs expressing interest in the study, 10 were enrolled in this study. Participants attended three in-person visits (consent/screen, baseline, and end-of-study). The SRP consisted of education related to resilience enhancement and a breathing device (BreatherFit®) for combined respiratory muscle training (cRMT). Participants completed 4 weeks of cRMT and applied situational breathing strategies as needed. Outcomes measured were changes in stress (PSS-10), resilience (BRS), depression (PRIME-MD), and sleep (PSQI and Oura Ring®). FINDINGS: The majority of participants were male (60%) and White (60%) with an average age of 39.7 years. Changes from baseline to end-of-treatment indicated a positive trend with significant stress reduction (-3.2 ± 3.9, p = .028) and nonsignificant depression reduction (-0.5 ± 0.7, p = .05). Resilience was high at baseline and continued to stay high during the study with a nonsignificant increase at end-of-study (+0.07 ± 0.7, p = .77). No changes in overall sleep scores were noted. All participants agreed the study was worthwhile, 80% indicated they would repeat the experience, while 90% indicated they would recommend the study to others. CONCLUSION/APPLICATION TO PRACTICE: Because of its size and portability, SRP is an easily applicable and promising option for reducing stress among HCPs during a high-stress period, such as a pandemic. Larger studies are needed.

Impact of a High-Risk, Ambulatory COVID-19 Remote Patient Monitoring Program on Utilization, Cost, and Mortality.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate care utilization, cost, and mortality among high-risk patients enrolled in a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remote patient monitoring (RPM) program. METHODS: This retrospective analysis included patients diagnosed with COVID-19 at risk for severe disease who enrolled in the RPM program between March 2020 and October 2021. The program included in-home technology for symptom and physiologic data monitoring with centralized care management. Propensity score matching established matched cohorts of RPM-engaged (defined as ≥1 RPM technology interactions) and non-engaged patients using a logistic regression model of 59 baseline characteristics. Billing codes and the electronic death certificate system were used for data abstraction from the electronic health record and reporting of care utilization and mortality endpoints. RESULTS: Among 5796 RPM-enrolled patients, 80.0% engaged with the technology. Following matching, 1128 pairs of RPM-engaged and non-engaged patients comprised the analysis cohorts. Mean patient age was 63.3 years, 50.9% of patients were female, and 81.9% were non-Hispanic White. Patients who were RPM-engaged experienced significantly lower rates of 30-day, all-cause hospitalization (13.7% vs 18.0%, P=.01), prolonged hospitalization (3.5% vs 6.7%, P=.001), intensive care unit admission (2.3% vs 4.2%, P=.01), and mortality (0.5% vs 1.7%; odds ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.78; P=.01), as well as cost of care ($2306.33 USD vs $3565.97 USD, P=0.04), than those enrolled in RPM but non-engaged. CONCLUSION: High-risk COVID-19 patients enrolled and engaged in an RPM program experienced lower rates of hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, mortality, and cost than those enrolled and non-engaged. These findings translate to improved hospital bed access and patient outcomes.