COVID-19 in three waves in a tertiary referral hospital in Belgium: a comparison of patient characteristics, management, and outcome.

PURPOSE: Few studies have compared patient characteristics, clinical management, and outcome of patients with COVID-19 between the different epidemic waves. In this study, we describe patient characteristics, treatment, and outcome of patients admitted for COVID-19 in the Antwerp University Hospital over the first three epidemic waves of 2020-2021. METHODS: Retrospective observational study of COVID-19 patients in a Belgian tertiary referral hospital. All adult patients with COVID-19, hospitalized between February 29, 2020, and June 30, 2021, were included. Standardized routine medical data was collected from patient records. Risk factors were assessed with multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: We included 722 patients, during the first (n = 179), second (n = 347) and third (n = 194) wave. We observed the lowest disease severity at admission during the first wave, and more elderly and comorbid patients during the second wave. Throughout the subsequent waves we observed an increasing use of corticosteroids and high-flow oxygen therapy. In spite of increasing number of complications throughout the subsequent waves, mortality decreased each wave (16.6%,15.6% 11.9% in 1st, 2nd and 3rd wave respectively). C-reactive protein above 150 mg/L was predictive for the need for intensive care unit admission (odds ratio (OR) 3.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.32-6.15). A Charlson comorbidity index ≥ 5 (OR 5.68, 95% CI 2.54-12.70) and interhospital transfers (OR 3.78, 95% CI 2.05-6.98) were associated with a higher mortality. CONCLUSIONS: We observed a reduction in mortality each wave, despite increasing comorbidity. Evolutions in patient management such as high-flow oxygen therapy on regular wards and corticosteroid use may explain this favorable evolution.

Do-Not-ResuscitateDecision-Making during the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Teaching Hospital: Lessons Learned for the Future.

Method: A cross-sectional survey study was conducted between February 2021 and April 2021 for all doctors and doctors in training, working in the Antwerp University Hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: 127 doctors participated in this study. The familiarity with the different scores used in the triage during the COVID-10 pandemic was 51% for the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and 20% for the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Participants indicated that their DNR decision is based on various aspects such as clinical assessment, comorbidities, patient's wishes, age, prognosis, and functional state. Conclusion: The familiarity with the different scores used during triage assessments is low. The total clinical picture of the patient is needed to make a considered decision, and this total picture of the patient seems to be well encompassed by frailty measurement (CFS). Although many participants indicated that the different scores do not offer much added value compared to their clinical assessment, it can help guide DNR decisions, especially for doctors in training.