RESUMEN
BackgroundAfter mild COVID-19, some outpatients experience persistent symptoms. However, data are scarce and prospective studies are urgently needed. ObjectivesTo characterize the post-COVID-19 syndrome after mild COVID-19 and identify predictors. ParticipantsOutpatients with symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 with (1) PCR-confirmed COVID-19 (COVID-positive) or (2) SARS-CoV-2 negative PCR (COVID-negative). DesignMonocentric cohort study with prospective phone interview between more than three months to ten months after initial visit to the emergency department and outpatient clinics. Main MeasuresData of the initial visits were extracted from the electronic medical file. Predefined persistent symptoms were assessed through a structured phone interview. Associations between long-term symptoms and PCR results, as well as predictors of persistent symptoms among COVID-positive, were evaluated by multivariate logistic regression adjusted for age, gender, smoking, comorbidities, and timing of the survey. Key resultsThe study population consisted of 418 COVID-positive and 89 COVID-negative patients, mostly young adults (median age of 41 versus 36 years in COVID-positive and COVID-negative, respectively; p=0.020) and health care workers (67% versus 82%; p=0.006). Median time between the initial visit and the phone survey was 150 days in COVID-positive and 242 days in COVID-negative patients. Persistent symptoms were reported by 223 (53%) COVID-positive and 33 (37%) COVID-negative patients (p=0.006). Overall, 21% COVID-positive and 15% COVID-negative patients (p=0.182) attended care for this purpose. Four surveyed symptoms were independently associated with COVID-19: fatigue (adjusted odds ratio [or] 2.14, 95%CI 1.04-4.41), smell/taste disorder (26.5, 3.46-202), dyspnea (2.81, 1.10-7.16) and memory impairment (5.71, 1.53-21.3). Among COVID-positive, female gender (1.67, 1.09-2.56) and overweight/obesity (1.67, 1.10-2.56) were predictors of persistent symptoms. ConclusionsMore than half of COVID-positive outpatients report persistent symptoms up to ten months after a mild disease. Only 4 of 14 symptoms were associated with COVID-19 status. The symptoms and predictors of the post-COVID-19 syndrome need further characterization as this condition places a significant burden on society.
RESUMEN
BackgroundWhile facing a second wave in SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, in November 2020 the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH) authorized the use of rapid antigen tests (RATs) in addition to the gold-standard reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). MethodsWe implemented the use of RAT in the emergency ward of our university hospital for rapid patients triaging and compared performances of four different antigen tests. All results were compared to SARS-CoV-2 specific RT-PCR (reference standard). ResultsTriaging patients using RAT in association with RT-PCR allowed us to isolate promptly positive patients and to save resources, in a context of rapid RT-PCR reagents shortage. Among 532 patients with valid results, overall sensitivities were 48.3% for One Step Exdia and 41.2% for Standard Q(R), Panbio-and BD Veritor. All four antigen tests exhibited specificity above 99%. Sensitivity increased up to 74.6%, 66.2%, 66.2% and 64.8% for One Step Exdia, Standard Q, Panbio, and BD Veritor respectively, when considering viral loads above 105copies/ml, up to 100%, 97.8%, 96.6% and 95.6% for viral loads above 106 copies/ml and 100% (for all tests) when considering viral loads above 107 copies/ml. Sensitivity was significantly higher for patients presenting with symptoms onset within 4 days (74.3%, 69.2%, 69.2% and 64%, respectively) versus patients with evolution of symptoms for more than 4 days (36.8%, 21.1%, 21.1% and 23.7%, respectively). Sensitivities of all RAT assays were of only 33% among hospitalized patients without COVID-19 symptoms. ConclusionRAT might represent a useful epidemiological resource in selected clinical settings as a complementary tool to the molecular tests for rapid patients triaging, but the lower sensitivity compared to RT-PCR, especially in late presenters and subjects without COVID-19 symptoms, must be taken into account in order to correctly use RAT for triaging.
RESUMEN
BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is now a global pandemic with Europe and the USA at its epicenter. Little is known about risk factors for progression to severe disease in Europe. This study aims to describe the epidemiology of COVID-19 patients in a Swiss university hospital. MethodsThis retrospective observational study included all adult patients hospitalized with a laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection from March 1 to March 25, 2020. We extracted data from electronic health records. The primary outcome was the need to mechanical ventilation at day 14. We used multivariate logistic regression to identify risk factors for mechanical ventilation. Follow-up was of at least 14 days. Results200 patients were included, of whom 37 (18{middle dot}5%) needed mechanical ventilation at 14 days. The median time from symptoms onset to mechanical ventilation was 9{middle dot}5 days (IQR 7.00, 12.75). Multivariable regression showed increased odds of mechanical ventilation in males (3.26, 1.21-9.8; p=0.025), in patients who presented with a qSOFA score [≥]2 (6.02, 2.09-18.82; p=0.001), with bilateral infiltrate (5.75, 1.91-21.06; p=0.004) or with a CRP of 40 mg/l or greater (4.73, 1.51-18.58; p=0.013). ConclusionsThis study gives some insight in the epidemiology and clinical course of patients admitted in a European tertiary hospital with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Male sex, high qSOFA score, CRP of 40 mg/l or greater and a bilateral radiological infiltrate could help clinicians identify patients at high risk for mechanical ventilation.
