Pulmonary Function in People Living With Human Immunodeficiency Virus: A Meta-Analysis

Background: HIV can infect bronchial epithelial cells rendering individuals susceptible to lung damage. Our objective was to determine the effects of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection on pulmonary function tests. Methods: We performed a meta-analysis after conducting a literature search in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Virtual Health Library databases from inception to December 31st, 2022. We employed the inverse variance method with a random effects model to calculate the effect estimate as the mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We calculated the heterogeneity with the I2 statistic and performed a meta-regression analysis by age, sex, smoking, CD4 T-cells count and antiretroviral therapy. We also conducted a sensitivity analysis according to the studies’ publication date, and excluding the study with the greatest weight in the effect. The PROSPERO registry number was CRD42023401105. Results: The meta-analysis included 20 studies, with 7621 living with HIV and 7410 control participants. The pooled MD (95%CI) for the predicted percentage of FEV1, FVC and DLCO were −3.12 (−5.17, −1.06); p=0.003, −1.51 (−3.04, 0.02); p=0.05, and −5.26 (−6.64, −3.87); p<0.001, respectively. The pooled MD for FEV1/FVC was −0.01 (−0.02, −0.01); p=0.002. In all cases, there was a considerable heterogeneity. The meta-regression analysis showed that among studies heterogeneity was not explained by patient age, smoking, CD4 T-cells count or antiretroviral therapy. Conclusion: Pulmonary function tests are impaired in people living with HIV, independently of age, smoking, CD4 T-cells count, and geographical region. (AU)

Pulmonary Function in People Living With Human Immunodeficiency Virus: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: HIV can infect bronchial epithelial cells rendering individuals susceptible to lung damage. Our objective was to determine the effects of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection on pulmonary function tests. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis after conducting a literature search in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Virtual Health Library databases from inception to December 31st, 2022. We employed the inverse variance method with a random effects model to calculate the effect estimate as the mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We calculated the heterogeneity with the I2 statistic and performed a meta-regression analysis by age, sex, smoking, CD4 T-cells count and antiretroviral therapy. We also conducted a sensitivity analysis according to the studies' publication date, and excluding the study with the greatest weight in the effect. The PROSPERO registry number was CRD42023401105. RESULTS: The meta-analysis included 20 studies, with 7621 living with HIV and 7410 control participants. The pooled MD (95%CI) for the predicted percentage of FEV1, FVC and DLCO were -3.12 (-5.17, -1.06); p=0.003, -1.51 (-3.04, 0.02); p=0.05, and -5.26 (-6.64, -3.87); p<0.001, respectively. The pooled MD for FEV1/FVC was -0.01 (-0.02, -0.01); p=0.002. In all cases, there was a considerable heterogeneity. The meta-regression analysis showed that among studies heterogeneity was not explained by patient age, smoking, CD4 T-cells count or antiretroviral therapy. CONCLUSION: Pulmonary function tests are impaired in people living with HIV, independently of age, smoking, CD4 T-cells count, and geographical region.

Unified Protocol for the transdiagnostic treatment of emotional disorders in people with post COVID-19 condition: study protocol for a multiple baseline n-of-1 trial.

Background: Post COVID-19 syndrome, defined as the persistence of COVID-19 symptoms beyond 3 months, is associated with a high emotional burden. Post COVID-19 patients frequently present comorbid anxiety, depressive and related disorders (emotional disorders, EDs) which have an important impact on their quality of life. Unfortunately, psychological interventions to manage these EDs are rarely provided to post COVID-19 patients. Also importantly, most psychological interventions do not address comorbidity, namely simultaneous EDs present in COVID-19 patients. This study will explore the clinical utility and acceptability of a protocol-based cognitive-behavioral therapy called the Unified Protocol for the transdiagnostic treatment of EDs in patients suffering post COVID-19 condition. Methods: A multiple baseline n-of-1 trial will be used, as it allows participants to be their own comparison control. Sample will be composed of 60 patients diagnosed with post COVID-19 conditions and comorbid EDs from three Spanish hospitals. After meeting the eligibility criteria, participants will answer the pre-assessment protocol and then they will be randomly assigned to three different baseline conditions (6, 8, or 10 days of assessments before the intervention). Participants and professionals will be unblinded to participants' allocation. Once the baseline assessment has been completed, participants will receive the online psychological individual intervention through video-calls. The Unified Protocol intervention will comprise 8 sessions of a 1 h duration each. After the intervention, participants will answer the post-assessment protocol. Additional follow-up assessments will be conducted at one, three, six, and twelve months after the intervention. Primary outcomes will be anxiety and depressive symptoms. Secondary outcomes include quality of life, emotion dysregulation, distress tolerance, and satisfaction with the programme. Data analyses will include between-group and within-group differences and visual analysis of patients' progress. Discussion: Results from this study will be disseminated in scientific journals. These findings may help to provide valuable information in the implementation of psychological interventions for patients suffering post COVID-19 conditions. Clinical trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov, identifier (NCT05581277).

Improving prediction of COVID-19 mortality using machine learning in the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 registry.

COVID-19 is responsible for high mortality, but robust machine learning-based predictors of mortality are lacking. To generate a model for predicting mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using Gradient Boosting Decision Trees (GBDT). The Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 registry includes 24,514 pseudo-anonymized cases of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from 1 February 2020 to 5 December 2021. This registry was used as a GBDT machine learning model, employing the CatBoost and BorutaShap classifier to select the most relevant indicators and generate a mortality prediction model by risk level, ranging from 0 to 1. The model was validated by separating patients according to admission date, using the period 1 February to 31 December 2020 (first and second waves, pre-vaccination period) for training, and 1 January to 30 November 2021 (vaccination period) for the test group. An ensemble of ten models with different random seeds was constructed, separating 80% of the patients for training and 20% from the end of the training period for cross-validation. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) was used as a performance metric. Clinical and laboratory data from 23,983 patients were analyzed. CatBoost mortality prediction models achieved an AUC performance of 84.76 (standard deviation 0.45) for patients in the test group (potentially vaccinated patients not included in model training) using 16 features. The performance of the 16-parameter GBDT model for predicting COVID-19 hospital mortality, although requiring a relatively large number of predictors, shows a high predictive capacity.

Atrial fibrillation as a new prognosis factor in chronic patients after hospitalization: the CHRONIBERIA index.

A collaborative project in different areas of Spain and Portugal was designed to find out the variables that influence the mortality after discharge and develop a prognostic model adapted to the current healthcare needs of chronic patients in an internal medicine ward. Inclusion criteria were being admitted to an Internal Medicine department and at least one chronic disease. Patients' physical dependence was measured through Barthel index (BI). Pfeiffer test (PT) was used to establish cognitive status. We conducted logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models to analyze the influence of those variables on one-year mortality. We also developed an external validation once decided the variables included in the index. We enrolled 1406 patients. Mean age was 79.5 (SD = 11.5) and females were 56.5%. After the follow-up period, 514 patients (36.6%) died. Five variables were identified as significantly associated with 1 year mortality: age, being male, lower BI punctuation, neoplasia and atrial fibrillation. A model with such variables was created to estimate one-year mortality risk, leading to the CHRONIBERIA. A ROC curve was made to determine the reliability of this index when applied to the global sample. An AUC of 0.72 (0.7-0.75) was obtained. The external validation of the index was successful and showed an AUC of 0.73 (0.67-0.79). Atrial fibrillation along with an advanced age, being male, low BI score, or an active neoplasia in chronic patients could be critical to identify high risk multiple chronic conditions patients. Together, these variables constitute the new CHRONIBERIA index.

Guiding future research on psychological interventions in people with COVID-19 and post COVID syndrome and comorbid emotional disorders based on a systematic review.

Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic has been emotionally challenging for the entire population and especially for people who contracted the illness. This systematic review summarizes psychological interventions implemented in COVID-19 and long COVID-19 patients who presented comorbid emotional disorders. Methods and measures: 3,839 articles were identified in 6 databases and 43 of them were included in this work. Two independent researchers selected the articles and assessed their quality. Results: 2,359 adults were included in this review. Severity of COVID-19 symptoms ranged from asymptomatic to hospitalized patients; only 3 studies included long COVID-19 populations. Similar number of randomized controlled studies (n = 15) and case studies (n = 14) were found. Emotional disorders were anxiety and/or depressive symptoms (n = 39) and the psychological intervention most represented had a cognitive behavioral approach (n = 10). Length of psychological programs ranged from 1-5 sessions (n = 6) to 16 appointments (n = 2). Some programs were distributed on a daily (n = 4) or weekly basis (n = 2), but other proposed several sessions a week (n = 4). Short (5-10 min, n = 4) and long sessions (60-90 min, n = 3) are proposed. Most interventions were supported by the use of technologies (n = 18). Important risk of bias was present in several studies. Conclusion: Promising results in the reduction of depressive, anxiety and related disorders have been found. However, important limitations in current psychological interventions were detected (i.e., duration, format, length, and efficacy of interventions were not consistently established across investigations). The results derived from our work may help to understand clinical practices in the context of pandemics and could guide future efforts to manage emotional suffering in COVID-19 patients. A stepped model of care could help to determine the dosage, length and format of delivery for each patient.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO 2022 CRD42022367227. Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022367227.

C-Reactive Protein and Serum Albumin Ratio: A Feasible Prognostic Marker in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19.

(1) Background: C-reactive protein (CRP) and albumin are inflammatory markers. We analyzed the prognostic capacity of serum albumin (SA) and CRP for an outcome comprising mortality, length of stay, ICU admission, and non-invasive mechanical ventilation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study based on the Spanish national SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. Two multivariate logistic models were adjusted for SA, CRP, and their combination. Training and testing samples were used to validate the models. (3) Results: The outcome was present in 41.1% of the 3471 participants, who had lower SA (mean [SD], 3.5 [0.6] g/dL vs. 3.8 [0.5] g/dL; p < 0.001) and higher CRP (108.9 [96.5] mg/L vs. 70.6 [70.3] mg/L; p < 0.001). In the adjusted multivariate model, both were associated with poorer evolution: SA, OR 0.674 (95% CI, 0.551−0.826; p < 0.001); CRP, OR 1.002 (95% CI, 1.001−1.004; p = 0.003). The CRP/SA model had a similar predictive capacity (honest AUC, 0.8135 [0.7865−0.8405]), with a continuously increasing risk and cutoff value of 25 showing the highest predictive capacity (OR, 1.470; 95% CI, 1.188−1.819; p < 0.001). (4) Conclusions: SA and CRP are good independent predictors of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. For the CRP/SA ratio value, 25 is the cutoff for poor clinical course.

Risk Categories in COVID-19 Based on Degrees of Inflammation: Data on More Than 17,000 Patients from the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

(1) Background: The inflammation or cytokine storm that accompanies COVID-19 marks the prognosis. This study aimed to identify three risk categories based on inflammatory parameters on admission. (2) Methods: Retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with COVID-19, collected and followed-up from 1 March to 31 July 2020, from the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. The three categories of low, intermediate, and high risk were determined by taking into consideration the terciles of the total lymphocyte count and the values of C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, and D-dimer taken at the time of admission. (3) Results: A total of 17,122 patients were included in the study. The high-risk group was older (57.9 vs. 64.2 vs. 70.4 years; p < 0.001) and predominantly male (37.5% vs. 46.9% vs. 60.1%; p < 0.001). They had a higher degree of dependence in daily tasks prior to admission (moderate-severe dependency in 10.8% vs. 14.1% vs. 17%; p < 0.001), arterial hypertension (36.9% vs. 45.2% vs. 52.8%; p < 0.001), dyslipidemia (28.4% vs. 37% vs. 40.6%; p < 0.001), diabetes mellitus (11.9% vs. 17.1% vs. 20.5%; p < 0.001), ischemic heart disease (3.7% vs. 6.5% vs. 8.4%; p < 0.001), heart failure (3.4% vs. 5.2% vs. 7.6%; p < 0.001), liver disease (1.1% vs. 3% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.002), chronic renal failure (2.3% vs. 3.6% vs. 6.7%; p < 0.001), cancer (6.5% vs. 7.2% vs. 11.1%; p < 0.001), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (5.7% vs. 5.4% vs. 7.1%; p < 0.001). They presented more frequently with fever, dyspnea, and vomiting. These patients more frequently required high flow nasal cannula (3.1% vs. 4.4% vs. 9.7%; p < 0.001), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (0.9% vs. 3% vs. 6.3%; p < 0.001), invasive mechanical ventilation (0.6% vs. 2.7% vs. 8.7%; p < 0.001), and ICU admission (0.9% vs. 3.6% vs. 10.6%; p < 0.001), and had a higher percentage of in-hospital mortality (2.3% vs. 6.2% vs. 23.9%; p < 0.001). The three risk categories proved to be an independent risk factor in multivariate analyses. (4) Conclusion: The present study identifies three risk categories for the requirement of high flow nasal cannula, mechanical ventilation, ICU admission, and in-hospital mortality based on lymphopenia and inflammatory parameters.

Inappropriate antibiotic use in the COVID-19 era: Factors associated with inappropriate prescribing and secondary complications. Analysis of the registry SEMI-COVID.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with COVID-19 receive antibiotics despite the fact that bacterial co-infections are rare. This can lead to increased complications, including antibacterial resistance. We aim to analyze risk factors for inappropriate antibiotic prescription in these patients and describe possible complications arising from their use. METHODS: The SEMI-COVID-19 Registry is a multicenter, retrospective patient cohort. Patients with antibiotic were divided into two groups according to appropriate or inappropriate prescription, depending on whether the patient fulfill any criteria for its use. Comparison was made by means of multilevel logistic regression analysis. Possible complications of antibiotic use were also identified. RESULTS: Out of 13,932 patients, 3047 (21.6%) were prescribed no antibiotics, 6116 (43.9%) were appropriately prescribed antibiotics, and 4769 (34.2%) were inappropriately prescribed antibiotics. The following were independent factors of inappropriate prescription: February-March 2020 admission (OR 1.54, 95%CI 1.18-2.00), age (OR 0.98, 95%CI 0.97-0.99), absence of comorbidity (OR 1.43, 95%CI 1.05-1.94), dry cough (OR 2.51, 95%CI 1.94-3.26), fever (OR 1.33, 95%CI 1.13-1.56), dyspnea (OR 1.31, 95%CI 1.04-1.69), flu-like symptoms (OR 2.70, 95%CI 1.75-4.17), and elevated C-reactive protein levels (OR 1.01 for each mg/L increase, 95% CI 1.00-1.01). Adverse drug reactions were more frequent in patients who received ANTIBIOTIC (4.9% vs 2.7%, p < .001). CONCLUSION: The inappropriate use of antibiotics was very frequent in COVID-19 patients and entailed an increased risk of adverse reactions. It is crucial to define criteria for their use in these patients. Knowledge of the factors associated with inappropriate prescribing can be helpful.

Prior Treatment with Statins is Associated with Improved Outcomes of Patients with COVID-19: Data from the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

BACKGROUND: The impact of statins on COVID-19 outcomes is important given the high prevalence of their use among individuals at risk for severe COVID-19. Our aim is to assess whether patients receiving chronic statin treatment who are hospitalized with COVID-19 have reduced in-hospital mortality if statin therapy is maintained during hospitalization. METHODS: This work is a cross-sectional, observational, retrospective multicenter study that analyzed 2921 patients who required hospital admission at 150 Spanish centers included in the nationwide SEMI-COVID-19 Network. We compared the clinical characteristics and COVID-19 disease outcomes between patients receiving chronic statin therapy who maintained this therapy during hospitalization versus those who did not. Propensity score matching was used to match each statin user whose therapy was maintained during hospitalization to a statin user whose therapy was withdrawn during hospitalization. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, continuation of statin therapy was associated with lower all-cause mortality (OR 0.67, 0.54-0.83, p < 0.001); lower incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) (OR 0.76,0.6-0.97, p = 0.025), acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (OR 0.78, 0.69- 0.89, p < 0.001), and sepsis (4.82% vs 9.85%, p = 0.008); and less need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) (5.35% vs 8.57, p < 0.001) compared to patients whose statin therapy was withdrawn during hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Patients previously treated with statins who are hospitalized for COVID-19 and maintain statin therapy during hospitalization have a lower mortality rate than those in whom therapy is withdrawn. In addition, statin therapy was associated with a decreased probability that patients with COVID-19 will develop AKI, ARDS, or sepsis and decreases the need for IMV.

CRONIGAL: Prognostic index for chronic patients after hospital admission.

OBJECTIVE: We have followed patients admitted to a Polypathology and Advanced Age Unit for two years in order to identify the variables that best define the mortality prognosis at medium-term (1-2years) for chronic and polypathological patients requiring admission at an Internal Medicine Department. METHODS: This is an observational, prospective study in clinical practice. Polypathological, chronic or multimorbidity patients were included. The classification of the Spanish Ministry for Health was used in order to classify patients as chronic or polypathological. The Charlson Index and Barthel Index were estimated and the Pfeiffer test was administered. The Spanish PROFUND Index was also used. Logistic regression models and Cox proportional hazard model were built in order to study the influence of prognostic factors on survival. RESULTS: A total of 567 patients were included: 333 met polypathological (PPP) criteria and 234 chronic criteria (CC). Mean age was 84.8+7.3years. A total of 469 were followed up, most patients belonged to category E (282), 174 to category A and 118 to category C. The prognosis at one year of our patients can be estimated with 7 variables: age, neoplasia, delirium, Barthel, Pfeiffer, presence of atrial fibrillation, and creatinine. The area under the curve is 0.74. CONCLUSION: The variables dementia, neoplasia, delirium at admission, Barthel Index under 60, or deceased spouse have mortality prognosis value at one or two years. An index with 7 variables applicable to chronic and polypathological patients after admission may serve as tool to better manage complex chronic patients and follow them up.

[Reliability of the PROFUND index to predict 4-year mortality in polypathological patients]. / Utilidad del índice PROFUND para predecir la mortalidad a los 4 años en pacientes pluripatológicos.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the usefullness of the PROFUND index to assess the risk of global death after 4 years in polypathological patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Multicenter prospective cohort (Internal Medicine and Geriatrics) study. Polypathological patients admitted between March 1st and June 30th 2011 were included. For each patient, data concerning age, sex, living at home or in a nursing residence, polypathology categories, Charlson, Barthel and Lawton-Brody indexes, Pfeiffer questionnaire, socio-familial Gijon scale, delirium, number of drugs, hemoglobin and creatinine values were gathered, and the PROFUND index was calculated. The follow-up lasted 4 years. RESULTS: We included 441 patients, 324 from Internal Medicine and 117 from Geriatrics, with a mean age of 80.9 (8.7) years. Of them, 245 (55.6%) were women. Heart (62.7%), neurological (41.4%) and respiratory (37.3%) diseases were the most frequent. Geriatrics inpatients were older and more dependants and presented greater cognitive deterioration. After 4 years, 335 (76%) patients died. Mortality was associated with age, dyspnoea, Barthel index<60, delirium, advanced neoplasia and≥4 admissions in the last year. The area under the curve of the PROFUND index was 0.748, 95% CI 0.689-0.806, P<.001 in Internal Medicine and 0.517, 95% CI 0.369-0.666, P=.818 in Geriatrics patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The PROFUND index is a reliable tool for predicting long-term global mortality in polypathological patients from Internal Medicine but not from Geriatrics departments.

Factors associated with onset of delirium among internal medicine inpatients in Spain.

BACKGROUND: Delirium increases mortality and length of stay among hospital inpatients. Little is known about the incidence of delirium among inpatients receiving care in internal medicine nursing units in Spain. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to estimate frequency of delirium onset among internal medicine inpatients and identify factors associated with delirium onset using nursing records and administrative databases. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of 744 patients hospitalized in an internal medicine department in October 2010 and January, May, and October 2011. Data concerning occurrence of delirium, age, gender, living in a nursing residence, Barthel Index of activities of daily living, Norton scale for pressure ulcer risk, intravenous fluid therapy, urinary catheterization, presence of pressure ulcers, major diagnostic category at discharge, length of stay, and mean weight in the diagnosis-related group were gathered for each patient. Backward stepwise logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with onset of delirium. RESULTS: Ninety-seven (13%) patients experienced delirium. Factors associated with delirium were age (OR = 1.03, 95% CI [1.01, 1.06]), Barthel Index (OR = 0.99. 95% CI [0.98, 0.99]), and urinary catheterization (OR = 2.00, 95% CI [1.19, 3.68]). CONCLUSION: Increased age and presence of a urinary catheter were associated with increased onset of delirium, whereas higher levels of independence in activities of daily living were protective.