Evaluation of machine learning algorithms for renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors associated renal adverse event prediction.

BACKGROUND: Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) are commonly used medications. Renal adverse events associated with RAASi are hyperkalemia and acute kidney injury. We aimed to evaluate the performance of machine learning (ML) algorithms in order to define event associated features and predict RAASi associated renal adverse events. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data of patients recruited from five internal medicine and cardiology outpatient clinics were evaluated retrospectively. Clinical, laboratory, and medication data were acquired via electronic medical records. Dataset balancing and feature selection for machine learning algorithms were performed. Random forest (RF), k-nearest neighbor (kNN), naïve Bayes (NB), extreme gradient boosting (xGB), support vector machine (SVM), neural network (NN), and logistic regression (LR) were used to create a prediction model. RESULTS: 409 patients were included, and 50 renal adverse events occurred. The most important features predicting the renal adverse events were the index K and glucose levels, as well as having uncontrolled diabetes mellitus. Thiazides reduced RAASi associated hyperkalemia. kNN, RF, xGB and NN algorithms have the highest and similar AUC (≥ 98%), recall (≥ 94%), specifity (≥ 97%), precision (≥ 92%), accuracy (≥ 96%) and F1 statistics (≥ 94%) performance metrics for prediction. CONCLUSION: RAASi associated renal adverse events can be predicted prior to medication initiation by machine learning algorithms. Further prospective studies with large patient numbers are needed to create scoring systems as well as for their validation.

The Collateral Benefit of COVID Pandemic: Improved Pharmacological Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Practices in Non-COVID Patients.

Background: COVID-19 creates a hypercoagulable state with a wide spectrum of clinical manifestations. Of those, venous thromboembolism (VTE) is prevalent, and numerous studies have highlighted the importance of VTE prophylaxis. Pre-pandemic VTE prophylaxis practices have already been poor, despite guidelines. We hypothesized that the gap between guidelines and practices might have been closed due to increased awareness. Materials and Methods: Non-COVID-19 patients hospitalized in the internal medicine ward of a university hospital between January 1st, 2021, and June 30th, 2021, were assessed. VTE risk and thromboprophylaxis requirements were assessed using the Padua Prediction Score (PPS). The results were compared with the findings of the study conducted in the same setting before the pandemic. Results: A total of 267 patients were included, and 81 patients (30.3%) received prophylaxis. A total of 128 patients' (47.9%) PPS was ≥ 4, and 69 patients (53.9%) received prophylaxis; 12 low-risk patients (8.6%) received prophylaxis although it was not indicated. Compared to the pre-pandemic figures, both appropriate prophylaxis use and overuse rates have risen. While the increment rate of appropriate prophylaxis was statistically significant, the increment rate of overuse did not reach statistical significance. Patients hospitalized for infectious diseases and respiratory failure were more likely to receive appropriate prophylaxis. Conclusion: We have demonstrated a significant increase in appropriate pharmacologic prophylaxis rates among high-risk patients. Besides all the collateral damage the pandemic has created, it might also have brought collateral benefits with regards to VTE prophylaxis.

[Longitudinal Assessment of Anti-Spike-1 antibody Responses in a Group of Hospitalized Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infection]. / Hastaneye Yatan SARS-CoV-2 Enfeksiyonlu Bir Grup Hastanin Anti-Spike-1 Antikor Yanitlarinin Boylamsal Degerlendirilmesi.

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) has become a global cause of death/injury, particularly for those with limited access to vaccination programs and healthcare systems. The risk of re-infection is not negligible due to the emergence of new variants and the decrease in immunity of those who have recovered COVID-19 before. In this study, it was aimed to show longitudinally the change in antibody levels of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 who had an antibody response in the early stages of their infection and to reveal a response pattern that would help to predict patients whose antibody responses decreased or persisted over time. This observational, single-center study included 38 non-critical patients admitted to COVID-19 wards. Anti-spike-1 IgG levels were investigated by the "enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)" method in two different samples taken at different times in each patient. Two distinct anti-spike-1 IgG antibody response patterns were detected in the study; the first pattern was that with low antibody production at first who had an increase in antibody levels after an average of six months, and the second pattern was that the initially high antibody levels decreased after an average of six months. This paradoxical kinetic may blur physicians' predictions of antibody response. In general, anti-spike-1 antibody levels showed a moderate decrease after six months, but production seems to continue (mean ∆IgG= -0.77; σ= 4; p= 0.24). Higher antibody levels were observed at the beginning in patients with concomitant bacterial pneumonia (mean initial IgG= 7.67; σ= 3.54) (p= 0.03). Although the production of S1-IgG in patients recovered from severe acute respiratory system coronavirus2 (SARS-CoV-2) was modestly reduced compared to the beginning measurements, the production in general persisted during the study period. It appears that IgG responses increase or remain constant in individuals with relatively low IgG index values when controlled after an average of 180 days, while IgG tends to decrease in individuals with high IgG index values.

Independent predictors of in-hospital mortality and the need for intensive care in hospitalized non-critical COVID-19 patients: a prospective cohort study.

One of the most helpful strategies to deal with ongoing coronavirus pandemics is to use some prudence when treating patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. We aimed to evaluate the clinical, demographic, and laboratory parameters that might have predictive value for in-hospital mortality and the need for intensive care and build a model based on them. This study was a prospective, observational, single-center study including non-critical patients admitted to COVID-19 wards. Besides classical clinic-demographic features, basic laboratory parameters obtained on admission were tested, and then new models for each outcome were developed built on the most significant variables. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analyses were performed by calculating each model's probability. A total of 368 non-critical hospitalized patients were recruited, the need for ICU care was observed in 70 patients (19%). The total number of patients who died in either ICU or wards was 39 (10.6%). The first two models (based on clinical features and demographics) were developed to predict ICU and death, respectively; older age, male sex, active cancer, and low baseline saturation were noted to be independent predictors. The area under the curve values of the first two models were noted 0.878 and 0.882 (p < .001; confidence interval [CI] 95% [0.837-0.919], p < .001; CI 95% [0.844-0.922]). Following two models, the third and fourth were based on laboratory parameters with clinic-demographic features. Initial lower sodium and lower albumin levels were determined as independent factors in predicting the need for ICU care; higher blood urea nitrogen and lower albumin were independent factors in predicting in-hospital mortality. The area under the curve values of the third and fourth model was noted 0.938 and 0.929, respectively (p < .001; CI 95% [0.912-0.965], p < .001; CI 95% [0.895-962]). By integrating the widely available blood tests results with simple clinic demographic data, non-critical patients can be stratified according to their risk level. Such stratification is essential to filter the patients' non-critical underlying diseases and conditions that can obfuscate the physician's predictive capacity.

A COVID-19 first evaluation clinic at a university hospital in Turkey.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to analyze the usefulness of such a reserved area for the admission of the patients' symptoms suggesting COVID-19 and compare the demographic and clinical characteristics of the patients with COVID-19 and without COVID-19 who were admitted to C1 during the first month of the COVID-19 outbreak in our hospital. METHODS: A new area was set up in Hacettepe University Adult Hospital to limit the contact of COVID-19 suspicious patients with other patients, which was named as COVID-19 First Evaluation Outpatient Clinic (C1). C1 had eight isolation rooms and two sampling rooms for SARS-CoV-2 polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR). All rooms were negative-pressurized. Patients who had symptoms that were compatible with COVID-19 were referred to C1 from pretriage areas. All staff received training for the appropriate use of personal protective equipment and were visited daily by the Infection Prevention and Control team. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-eight (29.4%) of 673 patients who were admitted to C1were diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 20, 2020, and April 19, 2020. SARS-CoV-2 PCR was positive in 142 out of 673 patients. Chest computerized tomography (CT) was performed in 421 patients and COVID-19 was diagnosed in 56 of them based on CT findings despite negative PCR. Four hundred and ninety-three patients were tested for other viral and bacterial infections with multiplex real-time reverse-transcriptase PCR (RTPCR). Blood tests that included complete blood count, renal and liver functions, d-dimer levels, ferritin, C- reactive protein, and procalcitonin were performed in 593 patients. Only one out of 44 healthcare workers who worked at C1 was infected by SARS-CoV-2. DISCUSSION: Early diagnosis of infected patients and ensuring adequate isolation are very important to control the spread of COVID-19. The purpose of setting up the COVID-19 first evaluation outpatient clinic was to prevent the overcrowding of ER due to mild or moderate infections, ensure appropriate distancing and isolation, and enable emergency services to serve for real emergencies. A wellplanned outpatient care area and teamwork including internal medicine, microbiology, and radiology specialists under the supervision of infectious diseases specialists allowed adequate management of the mild-to-moderate patients with suspicion of COVID-19.

'Anxiety is still ongoing!' Evaluation of the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on anxiety severity of physicians working in the internal medicine department after 1 year: a collaborative cross-sectional study.

The COVID-19 pandemic has increased anxiety in society and particularly in healthcare workers, as shown with a questionnaire in our centre at the beginning of the pandemic. In this collaborative study, we aimed to evaluate the effects of the pandemic on anxiety 1 year later by applying the same questionnaire to the physicians working in the same department. A total of 77 participants consented to the study. The median age was 28 (interquartile range = 4) years and 55.8% were male. As in the first survey, female gender, having family members over 65 years of age, and having family members with chronic diseases were significantly associated with high anxiety scores and levels. There were no statistically significant differences between the first and second survey participants in any of the anxiety scales, which means anxiety persists.

"COVID-19: The final nail in the coffin for physical examination" Evaluation of the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on physical examination habits of residents in a university hospital: A cross-sectional survey.

AIMS: It is evident that the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the medical practice and training of residents. In this study, we evaluated the physical examination (PE) habits of residents working in a university hospital and how their PE practices did change during the pandemic. METHODS: This single-centre, non-interventional, cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted in a university hospital using an online survey questionnaire between 5 and 20 October 2020. RESULTS: Of the 308 residents who participated in the study, 172 of them (55.8%) were female and the median age was 27 (IQR (3) = Q1 (29)-Q3 (26)). Amongst all, 263 participants (85.4%) declared that they have worked in the areas where suspected/confirmed COVID-19 patients were being served. A total of 262 (85%) residents stated that PE habits have changed generally during the pandemic. There was a significant difference with regards to the change in PE habits between those residents who have worked in the COVID-19 areas (n = 230, 87.5%) and those who have not (n = 32, 71.1%) (P = .004). PE habits of Internal Medicine Residents were changed more than others (P < .001). The main reason for the change in PE habits in general (77.9%) and during the examination of suspected/confirmed COVID-19 patients (89.7%) were "self-protection." Independent factors for limited PE in suspected/confirmed COVID-19 patients were found as "Avoiding performing physical examination to be exposed less/to protect (adjusted ORs = 13.067)," "relying on laboratory and radiological investigations during practice (adjusted ORs = 4.358)," and "not having a thought that reduced physical examination will render the diagnosis and course of COVID-19 (adjusted ORs = 2.244)." CONCLUSIONS: This study clearly demonstrated that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a serious impact on the PE habits of the residents while examining patients in general and with COVID-19.

Characteristics and management of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused and is still causing tremendous morbidity, mortality, and damage to our societies. The disease course of COVID-19 can be unpredictable ranging from asymptomatic infections to multi-organ failure and death. Transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) from an asymptomatic infected individual to others has been observed early in the pandemic. Asymptomatic individuals have been shown to have quantitative SARS-CoV-2 viral loads, there may or may not be radiological and/or laboratory abnormalities. No antiviral therapy has been approved for the treatment of asymptomatic SARS-CoV2- infection. The management of asymptomatic individuals at home requires that the person can be monitored for any signs and symptoms of deterioration and that the requirements for infection prevention and control measures can be fulfilled. It is crucial to properly diagnose and manage asymptomatic COVID-19 cases with effective testing, contact tracing, quarantine, and isolation strategies. Preventing asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections that have a major role in the unhindered transmission of the virus is a milestone to take control of the pandemic. Vaccination has been proven to be the crucial pillar for preventing asymptomatic infections and real-life data will continue to exhibit the effects of community vaccination in breaking the transmission chain of SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Pretreatment serum uric acid level is not a surrogate marker for the outcome of favipiravir treatment in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: To the editor, Favipiravir (FVP) was developed against the influenza virus infection and licensed for the treatment of influenza in Japan [1]. In addition to influenza viruses, FVP demonstrates a broad-spectrum activity against many RNA viruses including Ebola, Lassa, rabies, and severe fever with thrombocytopenia [2]. FVP exhibited a comparable in vitro efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 with remdesivir in a cell culture model [3]. DISCUSSION: The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of numerous physicians, nurses, and healthcare personnel of Hacettepe University's COVID-19 response team for their selfless efforts in follow-up and care of the patients. Authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of Post-COVID-19 Functional Status Scale

Background/aim: The post-COVID-19 Functional Status (PCFS) has recently been developed for functional outcomes of COVID-19 upon discharge and in long term. The purpose of this study was to investigate the reliability and validity properties of the Turkish version of the PCFS in Turkish post-COVID-19 patients with hospitalized and nonhospitalized during infection. Materials and methods: One hundred participants with post-COVID-19 were included in this cross-sectional study. Test-retest reliability of the Turkish version of PCFS assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach's alpha was calculated for internal consistency. For construct validity, correlation coefficients between the Turkish version of PCFS developed by translation-back translation method and modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea scale (MMRC), London Chest Activities of Daily Living (LCADL) scale, Barthel Index (BI) were analyzed. Results: For test-retest reliability analysis, ICC ranged between 0.734 and 0.880. The total ICC score was 0.821, indicating excellent reliability. The Cronbach's alpha value of the PCFS test and retest scores were recorded as 0.821 indicating that the scale is quite reliable. The PCFS score was moderately correlated with the mMRC score (r = 0.534, p < 0.001) and weakly correlated with the LCADL self care (r = 0.311, p = 0.002), domestic (r = 0.277, p = 0.005), physical activity (r = 0.342, p < 0.001), leisure subscores (r = 0.434, p < 0.001) and total score (r = 0.399, p < 0.001). Conclusion: The Turkish version of the PCFS scale is reliable scale that reflects activity limitation and functional status after COVID-19. The Turkish version of the PCFS will be a guide for rehabilitation professionals to understand functional limitation after COVID-19 and to direct interventions accordingly to functional status of the patients at discharge and in long term.

Quality gap in venous thromboembolism prophylaxis practices in inpatients: Assessment of prophylaxis practices in a University Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a prevalent complication of inpatient care, causing high burden of morbidity and mortality. Prophylaxis reduces the events; thus, these practices are promoted. We aimed to assess the VTE prophylaxis practices in the general internal medicine wards of a tertiary-care university hospital and utilize these data to propose quality improvement projects. OBJECTIVE: Assess the pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis utilization by using the Padua Prediction Score and demonstrate the main determinants of inappropriate prophylaxis use. METHODS: Electronic medical records were used to collect data cross-sectionally from 1 January 2019 to 30 June 2019. Padua Prediction Score was used to assess the appropriateness of VTE prophylaxis. Underlying health conditions, hospitalization causes, anti-platelets and use of glucocorticoids were also assessed as confounding factors. RESULTS: A total of 295 patients were included. Higher proportion of patients who received VTE prophylaxis were obese and had higher rates of diabetes and coronary artery disease. Prophylaxis was more commonly utilized among patients who were elderly, obese, having an acute infection and/or rheumatologic disorder and prolonged bed rest (P ≤ 0.001, P = 0.01, P = 0.22 and P ≤ 0.001, respectively). Thirty-five patients (11.8%) received VTE prophylaxis, despite 89 patients (30.2%) were high-risk patients. In the high-risk group (n = 89), 27 patients (30.3%) received appropriate pharmacological prophylaxis, while 8 patients (3.9%) received VTE prophylaxis in the low-risk group (total n = 206). A considerable percentage of the high-risk population (69.6%) did not receive VTE prophylaxis. DISCUSSION: Underuse constitutes a major challenge in our hospital but differing from other institutions, overuse is not a significant issue. Further studies are needed whether VTE prophylaxis improvement implementations uniformly increase appropriate VTE use.

QuantiFERON®-TB Gold In-Tube test can be used for screening latent tuberculosis before biological treatment in a Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG)-vaccinated country: the HUR-BIO single-center real-life results.

OBJECTIVES: The Turkish population is vaccinated with Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG), and the BCG vaccination decreases the specificity of the tuberculin skin test (TST). The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence of active tuberculosis (TBC) among rheumatic patients who were screened only with the QuantiFERON®-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT-GIT) test for latent TBC prior to biological treatment. METHODS: The Hacettepe University Biological Database (HUR-BIO) was used for latent TBC assessment. Consecutive patients were evaluated from July 2015 to October 2016 by a questionnaire that included the patients' demographic characteristics, treatment history, and symptoms of active TBC. A total of 664 patients were interviewed by physicians. TBC statuses of the 671 non-interviewed patients were checked from the Turkish National Tuberculosis Registry records. Mean TBC incidence per year was calculated for anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) agents. RESULTS: A total of 1335 (58.2% female) patients with the mean age of 44.2 ± 12.9 years were included. Of the patients, 836 (62.6%) had spondyloarthropathy, 432 (32.4%) had rheumatoid arthritis, and 67 (5%) had other rheumatologic diseases. The total biological drug exposure was 2292 patient-years (2043 patient-years for anti-TNF-α, 249 patient-years for non-TNF-α inhibitors). Positive and indeterminate QFT-GIT results were found in 258 (19.3%) and 23 (1.7%) patients, respectively. The median follow-up time after the onset of biological agent was 19.4 months (IQR = 29.5). Pulmonary TBC was found in 3 (0.2%) of the 1335 patients. The annual incidence of TBC was 147/100,000 patient-years for all TNF-α inhibitors (249/100,000 and 123/100,000 patient-years for QFT-GIT-positive and negative patients, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: TBC incidence increased by nearly seven times the Turkish national TBC incidence. The QFT-GIT Test appears acceptable to determine latent TBC before biological agent use. Consequently, the QFT-GIT Test can be appropriately used in BCG-vaccinated countries. Key Points • Our study contributes to filling the gap in the literature by reflecting real-life data about TBC frequency after QFT-GIT use in patients receiving biological agents. • The frequency of active TBC will remain within acceptable limits when only QFT-GIT is used in the screening of latent TBC prior to the use of biological agents in a population where the majority are vaccinated with BCG. • Using the QFT-GIT alone for latent TBC screening prior to biologic treatment in countries with high BCG vaccination rates reduces the number of patients needing isoniazid (INH) treatment.

Outcome of noncritical COVID-19 patients with early hospitalization and early antiviral treatment outside the ICU

Background/aim: Despite the fact that the COVID-19 pandemic has been going on for over 5 months, there is yet to be a standard management policy for all patients including those with mild-to-moderate cases. We evaluated the role of early hospitalization in combination with early antiviral therapy with COVID-19 patients in a tertiary care university hospital. Materials and methods: This was a prospective, observational, single-center study on probable/confirmed COVID-19 patients hospitalized in a tertiary care hospital on COVID-19 wards between March 20 and April 30, 2020. The demographic, laboratory, and clinical data were collected. Results: We included 174 consecutive probable/confirmed COVID-19 adult patients hospitalized in the Internal Medicine wards of the University Adult Hospital between March 20 and April 30, 2020. The median age was 45.5 (19­92) years and 91 patients (52.3%) were male. One hundred and twenty (69%) were confirmed microbiologically, 41 (23.5%) were radiologically diagnosed, and 13 (7.5%) were clinically suspected (negative microbiological and radiological findings compatible with COVID-19); 35 (20.1%) had mild, 107 (61.5%) moderate disease, and 32 (18.4%) had severe pneumonia. Out of 171 cases, 130 (74.3%) showed pneumonia; 80 were typical, and 50 showed indeterminate infiltration for COVID-19. Patients were admitted within a median of 3 days (0-14 days) after symptoms appear. The median duration of hospitalization was 4 days (0-28 days). In this case series, 13.2% patients were treated with hydroxychloroquine alone, 64.9% with hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin, and 18.4% with regimens including favipiravir. A total of 15 patients (8.5%) were transferred to the ICU. Four patients died (2.2%). Conclusion: In our series, 174 patients were admitted to the hospital wards for COVID-19, 69% were confirmed with PCR and/or antibody test. At the time of admission, nearly one fifth of the patients had severe diseases. Of the patients, 95.4% received hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination. The overall case fatality rate was 2.2%.

Thirty-day readmission rate of COVID-19 patients discharged from a tertiary care university hospital in Turkey: an observational, single-center study.

BACKGROUND: The 30-day readmission rate is an important indicator of patient safety and hospital's quality performance. In this study, we aimed to find out the 30-day readmission rate of mild and moderate severity coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) patients discharged from a tertiary care university hospital and to demonstrate the possible factors associated with readmission. METHODS: This is an observational, single-center study. Epidemiological and clinical data of patients who were hospitalized with a diagnosis of COVID-19 were retrieved from a research database where patient information was recorded prospectively. Readmission data were sought from the hospital information management system and the National Health Information System to detect if the patients were readmitted to any hospital within 30 days of discharge. Adult patients (≥18 years old) hospitalized in COVID-19 wards with a diagnosis of mild or moderate COVID-19 between 20 March 2020 (when the first case was admitted to our hospital) and 26 April 2020 were included. RESULTS: From 26 March to 1 May, there were 154 mild or moderate severity (non-critical) COVID-19 patients discharged from COVID-19 wards, of which 11 (7.1%) were readmitted. The median time of readmission was 8.1 days (interquartile range [IQR] = 5.2). Two patients (18.1%) were categorized to have mild disease and the remaining 9 (81.9%) as moderate disease. Two patients who were over 65 years of age and had metastatic cancers and hypertension developed sepsis and died in the hospital during the readmission episode. Malignancy (18.7% vs. 2.1%, P = 0.04) and hypertension (45.5% vs. 14%, P = 0.02) were more common in those who were readmitted. CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the first studies to report on 30-day readmission rate of COVID-19 in the literature. More comprehensive studies are needed to reveal the causes and predictors of COVID-19 readmissions.

Evaluation of the effect of COVID-19 pandemic on anxiety severity of physicians working in the internal medicine department of a tertiary care hospital: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Internists who have an important role in the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic are under both physical and psychological pressures. AIMS: To assess the anxiety among physicians working in the internal medicine department of a tertiary care hospital who are on the frontline of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This single-centre, non-intervention, cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted using an online survey questionnaire from 1 April to 14 April 2020. Physicians of the Department of Internal Medicine were invited to participate with a self-administered questionnaire. The degree of symptoms of anxiety was assessed by the Turkish versions of the 7-item Generalised Anxiety Disorder scale and Beck Anxiety Inventory, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 113 participants consented for the study and completed the questionnaire. The median age was 29 (IQR = 5) years and 53.1% were male. A total of 72 internists (63.7%) worked as 'frontline' healthcare workers directly engaged in diagnosing, treating or caring for patients with or suspected to have COVID-19. Female gender was significantly associated with high scores and levels in all scales compared to the male gender (P < 0.005). Having family members over 65 years old and with chronic diseases were significantly associated with high anxiety scores and levels (P < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: In this survey of internists in a university hospital equipped with clinics, wards and intensive care unit for patients with COVID-19, female gender and having family members over 65 years old and with chronic diseases were associated with increased anxiety levels.