Clinical features, diagnostics, and outcomes of patients presenting with acute respiratory illness: A retrospective cohort study of patients with and without COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Most data on the clinical presentation, diagnostics, and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 have been presented as case series without comparison to patients with other acute respiratory illnesses. METHODS: We examined emergency department patients between February 3 and March 31, 2020 with an acute respiratory illness who were tested for SARS-CoV-2. We determined COVID-19 status by PCR and metagenomic next generation sequencing (mNGS). We compared clinical presentation, diagnostics, treatment, and outcomes. FINDINGS: Among 316 patients, 33 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2; 31 without COVID-19 tested positive for another respiratory virus. Among patients with additional viral testing (27/33), no SARS-CoV-2 co-infections were identified. Compared to those who tested negative, patients with COVID-19 reported longer symptoms duration (median 7d vs. 3d, p < 0.001). Patients with COVID-19 were more often hospitalized (79% vs. 56%, p = 0.014). When hospitalized, patients with COVID-19 had longer hospitalizations (median 10.7d vs. 4.7d, p < 0.001) and more often developed ARDS (23% vs. 3%, p < 0.001). Most comorbidities, medications, symptoms, vital signs, laboratories, treatments, and outcomes did not differ by COVID-19 status. INTERPRETATION: While we found differences in clinical features of COVID-19 compared to other acute respiratory illnesses, there was significant overlap in presentation and comorbidities. Patients with COVID-19 were more likely to be admitted to the hospital, have longer hospitalizations and develop ARDS, and were unlikely to have co-existent viral infections. FUNDING: National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Heart Lung Blood Institute, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Chan Zuckerberg Biohub, Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.

Clinical features, diagnostics, and outcomes of patients presenting with acute respiratory illness: a comparison of patients with and without COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Emerging data on the clinical presentation, diagnostics, and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 have largely been presented as case series. Few studies have compared these clinical features and outcomes of COVID-19 to other acute respiratory illnesses. METHODS: We examined all patients presenting to an emergency department in San Francisco, California between February 3 and March 31, 2020 with an acute respiratory illness who were tested for SARS-CoV-2. We determined COVID-19 status by PCR and metagenomic next generation sequencing (mNGS). We compared demographics, comorbidities, symptoms, vital signs, and laboratory results including viral diagnostics using PCR and mNGS. Among those hospitalized, we determined differences in treatment (antibiotics, antivirals, respiratory support) and outcomes (ICU admission, ICU interventions, acute respiratory distress syndrome, cardiac injury). FINDINGS: In a cohort of 316 patients, 33 (10%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2; 31 patients, all without COVID-19, tested positive for another respiratory virus (16%). Among patients with additional viral testing, no co-infections with SARS-CoV-2 were identified by PCR or mNGS. Patients with COVID-19 reported longer symptoms duration (median 7 vs. 3 days), and were more likely to report fever (82% vs. 44%), fatigue (85% vs. 50%), and myalgias (61% vs 27%); p<0.001 for all comparisons. Lymphopenia (55% vs 34%, p=0.018) and bilateral opacities on initial chest radiograph (55% vs. 24%, p=0.001) were more common in patients with COVID-19. Patients with COVID-19 were more often hospitalized (79% vs. 56%, p=0.014). Of 186 hospitalized patients, patients with COVID-19 had longer hospitalizations (median 10.7d vs. 4.7d, p<0.001) and were more likely to develop ARDS (23% vs. 3%, p<0.001). Most comorbidities, home medications, signs and symptoms, vital signs, laboratory results, treatment, and outcomes did not differ by COVID-19 status. INTERPRETATION: While we found differences in clinical features of COVID-19 compared to other acute respiratory illnesses, there was significant overlap in presentation and comorbidities. Patients with COVID-19 were more likely to be admitted to the hospital, have longer hospitalizations and develop ARDS, and were unlikely to have co-existent viral infections. These findings enhance understanding of the clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in comparison to other acute respiratory illnesses. .

Return to work after critical illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Survivors of critical illness often experience poor outcomes after hospitalisation, including delayed return to work, which carries substantial economic consequences. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of return to work after critical illness. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane Library from 1970 to February 2018. Data were extracted, in duplicate, and random-effects meta-regression used to obtain pooled estimates. RESULTS: Fifty-two studies evaluated return to work in 10 015 previously employed survivors of critical illness, over a median (IQR) follow-up of 12 (6.25-38.5) months. By 1-3, 12 and 42-60 months' follow-up, pooled return to work prevalence (95% CI) was 36% (23% to 49%), 60% (50% to 69%) and 68% (51% to 85%), respectively (τ2=0.55, I2=87%, p=0.03). No significant difference was observed based on diagnosis (acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) vs non-ARDS) or region (Europe vs North America vs Australia/New Zealand), but was observed when comparing mode of employment evaluation (in-person vs telephone vs mail). Following return to work, 20%-36% of survivors experienced job loss, 17%-66% occupation change and 5%-84% worsening employment status (eg, fewer work hours). Potential risk factors for delayed return to work include pre-existing comorbidities and post-hospital impairments (eg, mental health). CONCLUSION: Approximately two-thirds, two-fifths and one-third of previously employed intensive care unit survivors are jobless up to 3, 12 and 60 months following hospital discharge. Survivors returning to work often experience job loss, occupation change or worse employment status. Interventions should be designed and evaluated to reduce the burden of this common and important problem for survivors of critical illness. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42018093135.

Endogenous positive allosteric modulation of GABA(A) receptors by diazepam binding inhibitor.

Benzodiazepines (BZs) allosterically modulate γ-aminobutyric acid type-A receptors (GABAARs) to increase inhibitory synaptic strength. Diazepam binding inhibitor (DBI) protein is a BZ site ligand expressed endogenously in the brain, but functional evidence for BZ-mimicking positive modulatory actions has been elusive. We demonstrate an endogenous potentiation of GABAergic synaptic transmission and responses to GABA uncaging in the thalamic reticular nucleus (nRT) that is absent in both nm1054 mice, in which the Dbi gene is deleted, and mice in which BZ binding to α3 subunit-containing GABAARs is disrupted. Viral transduction of DBI into nRT is sufficient to rescue the endogenous potentiation of GABAergic transmission in nm1054 mice. Both mutations enhance thalamocortical spike-and-wave discharges characteristic of absence epilepsy. Together, these results indicate that DBI mediates endogenous nucleus-specific BZ-mimicking ("endozepine") roles to modulate nRT function and suppress thalamocortical oscillations. Enhanced DBI signaling might serve as a therapy for epilepsy and other neurological disorders.