Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 148
Filtrar
1.
BMJ Open ; 10(11): e043828, 2020 Nov 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33203640

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care services and overall (direct and indirect) excess deaths in people with cancer. METHODS: We employed near real-time weekly data on cancer care to determine the adverse effect of the pandemic on cancer services. We also used these data, together with national death registrations until June 2020 to model deaths, in excess of background (pre-COVID-19) mortality, in people with cancer. Background mortality risks for 24 cancers with and without COVID-19-relevant comorbidities were obtained from population-based primary care cohort (Clinical Practice Research Datalink) on 3 862 012 adults in England. RESULTS: Declines in urgent referrals (median=-70.4%) and chemotherapy attendances (median=-41.5%) to a nadir (lowest point) in the pandemic were observed. By 31 May, these declines have only partially recovered; urgent referrals (median=-44.5%) and chemotherapy attendances (median=-31.2%). There were short-term excess death registrations for cancer (without COVID-19), with peak relative risk (RR) of 1.17 at week ending on 3 April. The peak RR for all-cause deaths was 2.1 from week ending on 17 April. Based on these findings and recent literature, we modelled 40% and 80% of cancer patients being affected by the pandemic in the long-term. At 40% affected, we estimated 1-year total (direct and indirect) excess deaths in people with cancer as between 7165 and 17 910, using RRs of 1.2 and 1.5, respectively, where 78% of excess deaths occured in patients with ≥1 comorbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Dramatic reductions were detected in the demand for, and supply of, cancer services which have not fully recovered with lockdown easing. These may contribute, over a 1-year time horizon, to substantial excess mortality among people with cancer and multimorbidity. It is urgent to understand how the recovery of general practitioner, oncology and other hospital services might best mitigate these long-term excess mortality risks.

2.
Eur Heart J ; 41(41): 4011-4020, 2020 Nov 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33205821

RESUMO

AIMS: The risk and burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD) are higher in homeless than in housed individuals but population-based analyses are lacking. The aim of this study was to investigate prevalence, incidence and outcomes across a range of specific CVDs among homeless individuals. METHODS AND RESULTS : Using linked UK primary care electronic health records (EHRs) and validated phenotypes, we identified homeless individuals aged ≥16 years between 1998 and 2019, and age- and sex-matched housed controls in a 1:5 ratio. For 12 CVDs (stable angina; unstable angina; myocardial infarction; sudden cardiac death or cardiac arrest; unheralded coronary death; heart failure; transient ischaemic attack; ischaemic stroke; subarachnoid haemorrhage; intracerebral haemorrhage; peripheral arterial disease; abdominal aortic aneurysm), we estimated prevalence, incidence, and 1-year mortality post-diagnosis, comparing homeless and housed groups. We identified 8492 homeless individuals (32 134 matched housed individuals). Comorbidities and risk factors were more prevalent in homeless people, e.g. smoking: 78.1% vs. 48.3% and atrial fibrillation: 9.9% vs. 8.6%, P < 0.001. CVD prevalence (11.6% vs. 6.5%), incidence (14.7 vs. 8.1 per 1000 person-years), and 1-year mortality risk [adjusted hazard ratio 1.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29-2.08, P < 0.001] were higher, and onset was earlier (difference 4.6, 95% CI 2.8-6.3 years, P < 0.001), in homeless, compared with housed people. Homeless individuals had higher CVD incidence in all three arterial territories than housed people. CONCLUSION : CVD in homeless individuals has high prevalence, incidence, and 1-year mortality risk post-diagnosis with earlier onset, and high burden of risk factors. Inclusion health and social care strategies should reflect this high preventable and treatable burden, which is increasingly important in the current COVID-19 context.

3.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33185672

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Risk prediction models are widely used to inform evidence-based clinical decision making. However, few models developed from single cohorts can perform consistently well at population level where diverse prognoses exist (such as the SARS-CoV2 pandemic). This study aims at tackling this challenge by synergising prediction models from the literature using ensemble learning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study we selected and reimplemented seven prediction models for COVID-19, which were derived from diverse cohorts and used different implementation techniques. A novel ensemble learning framework was proposed to synergise them for realising personalised predictions for individual patients. Four diverse international cohorts (2 from the UK and 2 from China; total N=5,394) were used to validate all eight models on discrimination, calibration and clinical usefulness. RESULTS: Results showed that individual prediction models could perform well on some cohorts while poorly on others. Conversely, the ensemble model achieved the best performances consistently on all metrics quantifying discrimination, calibration and clinical usefulness. Performance disparities were observed in cohorts from the two countries: all models achieved better performances on the China cohorts. DISCUSSION: When individual models were learned from complementary cohorts, the synergised model will have the potential to achieve synergised performances. Results indicate that blood parameters and physiological measurements might have better predictive powers when collected early, which remains to be confirmed by further studies. CONCLUSIONS: Combining a diverse set of individual prediction models, ensemble method can synergise a robust and well-performing model by choosing the most competent ones for individual patients.

4.
Heart ; 2020 Oct 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33020224

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To monitor hospital activity for presentation, diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular diseases during the COVID-19) pandemic to inform on indirect effects. METHODS: Retrospective serial cross-sectional study in nine UK hospitals using hospital activity data from 28 October 2019 (pre-COVID-19) to 10 May 2020 (pre-easing of lockdown) and for the same weeks during 2018-2019. We analysed aggregate data for selected cardiovascular diseases before and during the epidemic. We produced an online visualisation tool to enable near real-time monitoring of trends. RESULTS: Across nine hospitals, total admissions and emergency department (ED) attendances decreased after lockdown (23 March 2020) by 57.9% (57.1%-58.6%) and 52.9% (52.2%-53.5%), respectively, compared with the previous year. Activity for cardiac, cerebrovascular and other vascular conditions started to decline 1-2 weeks before lockdown and fell by 31%-88% after lockdown, with the greatest reductions observed for coronary artery bypass grafts, carotid endarterectomy, aortic aneurysm repair and peripheral arterial disease procedures. Compared with before the first UK COVID-19 (31 January 2020), activity declined across diseases and specialties between the first case and lockdown (total ED attendances relative reduction (RR) 0.94, 0.93-0.95; total hospital admissions RR 0.96, 0.95-0.97) and after lockdown (attendances RR 0.63, 0.62-0.64; admissions RR 0.59, 0.57-0.60). There was limited recovery towards usual levels of some activities from mid-April 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial reductions in total and cardiovascular activities are likely to contribute to a major burden of indirect effects of the pandemic, suggesting they should be monitored and mitigated urgently.

5.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33079204

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Limited data exists on the impact of COVID-19 on national changes in cardiac procedure activity, including patient characteristics and clinical outcomes before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND RESULTS: All major cardiac procedures (n = 374,899) performed between 1st January and 31st May for the years 2018, 2019 and 2020 were analysed, stratified by procedure type and time-period (pre-COVID: January-May 2018 and 2019 and January-February 2020 and COVID: March-May 2020). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to examine the odds ratio (OR) of 30-day mortality for procedures performed in the COVID period.Overall, there was a deficit of 45,501 procedures during the COVID period compared to the monthly averages (March-May) in 2018-2019. Cardiac catheterisation and device implantations were the most affected in terms of numbers (n = 19,637 and n = 10,453) whereas surgical procedures such as MVR, other valve replacement/repair, ASD/VSD repair and CABG were the most affected as a relative percentage difference (Δ) to previous years' averages. TAVR was the least affected (Δ-10.6%). No difference in 30-day mortality was observed between pre-COVID and COVID time-periods for all cardiac procedures except cardiac catheterisation (OR 1.25 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-1.47, p = 0.006) and cardiac device implantation (OR 1.35 95% CI 1.15-1.58, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Cardiac procedural activity has significantly declined across England during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a deficit in excess of 45000 procedures, without an increase in risk of mortality for most cardiac procedures performed during the pandemic. Major restructuring of cardiac services is necessary to deal with this deficit, which would inevitably impact long-term morbidity and mortality.

6.
CJC Open ; 2020 Sep 20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32984798

RESUMO

Background: Epidemiological studies suggest that black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) patients may be at risk of worse outcomes from Coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) but the pathophysiological drivers for this association are unknown. This study sought to investigate the relationship between findings on echocardiography, mortality and race in COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods: This was a multicenter, retrospective, observational study including 164 adults (61±13years; 78% male; 36% BAME) hospitalized with COVID-19 undergoing echocardiography between March 16 and May 9, 2020 at 3 days (IQR 2 - 5) from admission. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Results: After a median follow up of 31 days (IQR 14 - 42 days), 58 (35%) patients had died. The right ventricle (RV) was dilated in 62 (38%) patients, and 58 (35%) patients had RV systolic dysfunction. Only 2 (1%) patients had left ventricular (LV) dilatation and 133 (81%) had normal or hyperdynamic LV systolic function. Reduced tricuspid annulus planar systolic excursion was associated with elevated D-dimer (ρ = -0.18, p = 0.025) and high-sensitivity cardiac Troponin (ρ = -0.30, p < 0.0001). Reduced RV systolic function (HR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.05 - 3.09; p = 0.032) was an independent predictor of all-cause mortality after adjustment for demographic and clinical risk factors. Comparing white and BAME individuals, there were no differences in echocardiography findings, biomarkers or mortality. Conclusions: In patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia, reduced RV systolic function is prevalent and associated with all-cause mortality. There is however, no racial variation in the early findings on echocardiography, biomarkers or mortality.

7.
Glob Heart ; 15(1): 44, 2020 07 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32923338

RESUMO

In this paper, we provide recommendations on the management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among patients with confirmed or suspected coronavirus disease (COVID-19) to facilitate the decision making of healthcare professionals in low resource settings. The emergence of novel coronavirus disease, also known as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), has presented an unprecedented global challenge for the healthcare community. The ability of SARS-CoV-2 to get transmitted during the asymptomatic phase and its high infectivity have led to the rapid transmission of COVID-19 beyond geographic regions, leading to a pandemic. There is concern that COVID-19 is cardiotropic, and it interacts with the cardiovascular system on multiple levels. Individuals with established CVD are more susceptible to severe COVID-19. Through a consensus approach involving an international group this WHF statement summarizes the links between cardiovascular disease and COVID-19 and present some practical recommendations for the management of hypertension and diabetes, acute coronary syndrome, heart failure, rheumatic heart disease, Chagas disease, and myocardial injury for patients with COVID-19 in low-resource settings. This document is not a clinical guideline and it is not intended to replace national clinical guidelines or recommendations. Given the rapidly growing burden posed by COVID-19 illness and the associated severe prognostic implication of CVD involvement, further research is required to understand the potential mechanisms linking COVID-19 and CVD, clinical presentation, and outcomes of various cardiovascular manifestations in COVID-19 patients.


Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares/complicações , Doenças Cardiovasculares/terapia , Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Árvores de Decisões , Recursos em Saúde , Humanos , Pandemias , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto
8.
Diabetes Obes Metab ; 2020 Sep 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32893440

RESUMO

AIMS: We compared the new use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP4i) and the risk of cardiorenal disease, heart failure (HF) or chronic kidney disease (CKD), in patients with type 2 diabetes without a history of prevalent cardiovascular and renal disease, defined as cardiovascular and renal disease (CVRD) free, managed in routine clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this observational cohort study, patients were identified from electronic health records from England, Germany, Japan, Norway, South Korea and Sweden, during 2012-2018. In total, 1 006 577 CVRD-free new users of SGLT2i or DPP4i were propensity score matched 1:1. Unadjusted Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for outcomes: cardiorenal disease, HF, CKD, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the treatment groups (n = 105 130 in each group) with total follow-up of 187 955 patient years. Patients had a mean age of 56 years, 43% were women and they were indexed between 2013 and 2018. The most commonly used agents were dapagliflozin (91.7% of exposure time) and sitagliptin/linagliptin (55.0%), in the SGLT2i and DPP4i, groups, respectively. SGLT2i was associated with lower risk of cardiorenal disease, HF, CKD, all-cause and cardiovascular mortality; HR (95% confidence interval), 0.56 (0.42-0.74), 0.71 (0.59-0.86), 0.44 (0.28-0.69), 0.67 (0.59-0.77), and 0.61 (0.44-0.85), respectively. No differences were observed for stroke [0.87 (0.69-1.09)] and MI [0.94 (0.80-1.11)]. CONCLUSION: In this multinational observational study, SGLT2i was associated with a lower risk of HF and CKD versus DPP4i in patients with type 2 diabetes otherwise free from both cardiovascular and renal disease.

9.
Glob Heart ; 15(1): 45, 2020 Jul 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32923339

RESUMO

"A multimorbidity lens creates exciting opportunities to reconceptualise health and wellbeing in all its complexity. We need to improve health metrics to capture this complexity and strengthen health services to respond to it."

12.
PLoS One ; 15(8): e0237298, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32790708

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to model the impact of coronavirus (COVID-19) on the clinical academic response in England, and to provide recommendations for COVID-related research. DESIGN: A stochastic model to determine clinical academic capacity in England, incorporating the following key factors which affect the ability to conduct research in the COVID-19 climate: (i) infection growth rate and population infection rate (from UK COVID-19 statistics and WHO); (ii) strain on the healthcare system (from published model); and (iii) availability of clinical academic staff with appropriate skillsets affected by frontline clinical activity and sickness (from UK statistics). SETTING: Clinical academics in primary and secondary care in England. PARTICIPANTS: Equivalent of 3200 full-time clinical academics in England. INTERVENTIONS: Four policy approaches to COVID-19 with differing population infection rates: "Italy model" (6%), "mitigation" (10%), "relaxed mitigation" (40%) and "do-nothing" (80%) scenarios. Low and high strain on the health system (no clinical academics able to do research at 10% and 5% infection rate, respectively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of full-time clinical academics available to conduct clinical research during the pandemic in England. RESULTS: In the "Italy model", "mitigation", "relaxed mitigation" and "do-nothing" scenarios, from 5 March 2020 the duration (days) and peak infection rates (%) are 95(2.4%), 115(2.5%), 240(5.3%) and 240(16.7%) respectively. Near complete attrition of academia (87% reduction, <400 clinical academics) occurs 35 days after pandemic start for 11, 34, 62, 76 days respectively-with no clinical academics at all for 37 days in the "do-nothing" scenario. Restoration of normal academic workforce (80% of normal capacity) takes 11, 12, 30 and 26 weeks respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pandemic COVID-19 crushes the science needed at system level. National policies mitigate, but the academic community needs to adapt. We highlight six key strategies: radical prioritisation (eg 3-4 research ideas per institution), deep resourcing, non-standard leadership (repurposing of key non-frontline teams), rationalisation (profoundly simple approaches), careful site selection (eg protected sites with large academic backup) and complete suspension of academic competition with collaborative approaches.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus , Pesquisa Biomédica/métodos , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Assistência à Saúde/métodos , Inglaterra/epidemiologia , Seguimentos , Pessoal de Saúde/organização & administração , Mão de Obra em Saúde/organização & administração , Humanos , Modelos Estatísticos , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Saúde Pública/métodos
14.
Sci Rep ; 10(1): 12468, 2020 07 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32719438

RESUMO

Patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have an increased risk of atrial fibrillation (AF). The current study aimed to investigate the prevalence and treatment of AF in patients with T2DM, assess the impact of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) introduction on oral anticoagulant (OACs) prescribing rates, and factors associated with OAC initiations in patients with T2DM and AF. The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database (2001-2016), was used to examine the annual prevalence and treatment of AF in T2DM. The impact of DOACs introduction on OAC prescribing rates were investigated using interrupted time series analysis (ITS). Factors associated with OAC initiations were also identified using multivariate logistic regression. The prevalence of AF increased from 2.7 [95% confidence intervals (CI) 2.5-2.8] in 2001 to 5.0 (4.9-5.1) in 2016 per 100 persons. OACs prescribing within 30-days of AF diagnosis increased from 21.5% in 2001 to 56.8% in 2016. ITS analysis showed that OAC prescribing increased after DOAC introduction (P < 0.001), however, no immediate change was observed (P = 0.29). T2DM patients with AF, aged 60-79, male gender and BMI ≥ 25 were more likely to receive OAC, adjusted OR 1.3 (1.2-1.5) for aged 60-79, 1.3 (1.2-1.4) for male gender and 2.0 (1.9-2.2) for BMI ≥ 25, respectively. This study highlighted an increase in prevalence of AF in patients with T2DM during the study period. Further studies are warranted to investigate factors contributing to the underuse of OAC in patients with T2DM and AF.

15.
Heart ; 106(19): 1483-1488, 2020 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32665359

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To identify: (i) risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in homeless versus housed individuals and (ii) interventions for CVD in homeless populations. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review in EMBASE until December 2018 using a search strategy for observational and interventional studies without restriction regarding languages or countries. Meta-analyses were conducted, where appropriate and possible. Outcome measures were all-cause and CVD mortality, and morbidity. RESULTS: Our search identified 17 articles (6 case-control, 11 cohort) concerning risk of CVD and none regarding specific interventions. Nine were included to perform a meta-analysis. The majority (13/17, 76.4%) were high quality and all were based in Europe or North America, including 765 459 individuals, of whom 32 721 were homeless. 12/17 studies were pre-2011. Homeless individuals were more likely to have CVD than non-homeless individuals (pooled OR 2.96; 95% CI 2.80 to 3.13; p<0.0001; heterogeneity p<0.0001; I2=99.1%) and had increased CVD mortality (age-standardised mortality ratio range: 2.6-6.4). Compared with non-homeless individuals, hypertension was more likely in homeless people (pooled OR 1.38-1.75, p=0.0070; heterogeneity p=0.935; I2=0.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Homeless people have an approximately three times greater risk of CVD and an increased CVD mortality. However, there are no studies of specific pathways/interventions for CVD in this population. Future research should consider design and evaluation of tailored interventions or integrating CVD into existing interventions.

17.
Lancet Glob Health ; 2020 Jun 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-598578

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The risk of severe COVID-19 if an individual becomes infected is known to be higher in older individuals and those with underlying health conditions. Understanding the number of individuals at increased risk of severe COVID-19 and how this varies between countries should inform the design of possible strategies to shield or vaccinate those at highest risk. METHODS: We estimated the number of individuals at increased risk of severe disease (defined as those with at least one condition listed as "at increased risk of severe COVID-19" in current guidelines) by age (5-year age groups), sex, and country for 188 countries using prevalence data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2017 and UN population estimates for 2020. The list of underlying conditions relevant to COVID-19 was determined by mapping the conditions listed in GBD 2017 to those listed in guidelines published by WHO and public health agencies in the UK and the USA. We analysed data from two large multimorbidity studies to determine appropriate adjustment factors for clustering and multimorbidity. To help interpretation of the degree of risk among those at increased risk, we also estimated the number of individuals at high risk (defined as those that would require hospital admission if infected) using age-specific infection-hospitalisation ratios for COVID-19 estimated for mainland China and making adjustments to reflect country-specific differences in the prevalence of underlying conditions and frailty. We assumed males were twice at likely as females to be at high risk. We also calculated the number of individuals without an underlying condition that could be considered at increased risk because of their age, using minimum ages from 50 to 70 years. We generated uncertainty intervals (UIs) for our estimates by running low and high scenarios using the lower and upper 95% confidence limits for country population size, disease prevalences, multimorbidity fractions, and infection-hospitalisation ratios, and plausible low and high estimates for the degree of clustering, informed by multimorbidity studies. FINDINGS: We estimated that 1·7 billion (UI 1·0-2·4) people, comprising 22% (UI 15-28) of the global population, have at least one underlying condition that puts them at increased risk of severe COVID-19 if infected (ranging from <5% of those younger than 20 years to >66% of those aged 70 years or older). We estimated that 349 million (186-787) people (4% [3-9] of the global population) are at high risk of severe COVID-19 and would require hospital admission if infected (ranging from <1% of those younger than 20 years to approximately 20% of those aged 70 years or older). We estimated 6% (3-12) of males to be at high risk compared with 3% (2-7) of females. The share of the population at increased risk was highest in countries with older populations, African countries with high HIV/AIDS prevalence, and small island nations with high diabetes prevalence. Estimates of the number of individuals at increased risk were most sensitive to the prevalence of chronic kidney disease, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and chronic respiratory disease. INTERPRETATION: About one in five individuals worldwide could be at increased risk of severe COVID-19, should they become infected, due to underlying health conditions, but this risk varies considerably by age. Our estimates are uncertain, and focus on underlying conditions rather than other risk factors such as ethnicity, socioeconomic deprivation, and obesity, but provide a starting point for considering the number of individuals that might need to be shielded or vaccinated as the global pandemic unfolds. FUNDING: UK Department for International Development, Wellcome Trust, Health Data Research UK, Medical Research Council, and National Institute for Health Research.

18.
Lancet Glob Health ; 8(8): e1003-e1017, 2020 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32553130

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The risk of severe COVID-19 if an individual becomes infected is known to be higher in older individuals and those with underlying health conditions. Understanding the number of individuals at increased risk of severe COVID-19 and how this varies between countries should inform the design of possible strategies to shield or vaccinate those at highest risk. METHODS: We estimated the number of individuals at increased risk of severe disease (defined as those with at least one condition listed as "at increased risk of severe COVID-19" in current guidelines) by age (5-year age groups), sex, and country for 188 countries using prevalence data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2017 and UN population estimates for 2020. The list of underlying conditions relevant to COVID-19 was determined by mapping the conditions listed in GBD 2017 to those listed in guidelines published by WHO and public health agencies in the UK and the USA. We analysed data from two large multimorbidity studies to determine appropriate adjustment factors for clustering and multimorbidity. To help interpretation of the degree of risk among those at increased risk, we also estimated the number of individuals at high risk (defined as those that would require hospital admission if infected) using age-specific infection-hospitalisation ratios for COVID-19 estimated for mainland China and making adjustments to reflect country-specific differences in the prevalence of underlying conditions and frailty. We assumed males were twice at likely as females to be at high risk. We also calculated the number of individuals without an underlying condition that could be considered at increased risk because of their age, using minimum ages from 50 to 70 years. We generated uncertainty intervals (UIs) for our estimates by running low and high scenarios using the lower and upper 95% confidence limits for country population size, disease prevalences, multimorbidity fractions, and infection-hospitalisation ratios, and plausible low and high estimates for the degree of clustering, informed by multimorbidity studies. FINDINGS: We estimated that 1·7 billion (UI 1·0-2·4) people, comprising 22% (UI 15-28) of the global population, have at least one underlying condition that puts them at increased risk of severe COVID-19 if infected (ranging from <5% of those younger than 20 years to >66% of those aged 70 years or older). We estimated that 349 million (186-787) people (4% [3-9] of the global population) are at high risk of severe COVID-19 and would require hospital admission if infected (ranging from <1% of those younger than 20 years to approximately 20% of those aged 70 years or older). We estimated 6% (3-12) of males to be at high risk compared with 3% (2-7) of females. The share of the population at increased risk was highest in countries with older populations, African countries with high HIV/AIDS prevalence, and small island nations with high diabetes prevalence. Estimates of the number of individuals at increased risk were most sensitive to the prevalence of chronic kidney disease, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and chronic respiratory disease. INTERPRETATION: About one in five individuals worldwide could be at increased risk of severe COVID-19, should they become infected, due to underlying health conditions, but this risk varies considerably by age. Our estimates are uncertain, and focus on underlying conditions rather than other risk factors such as ethnicity, socioeconomic deprivation, and obesity, but provide a starting point for considering the number of individuals that might need to be shielded or vaccinated as the global pandemic unfolds. FUNDING: UK Department for International Development, Wellcome Trust, Health Data Research UK, Medical Research Council, and National Institute for Health Research.


Assuntos
Doença Crônica/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Saúde Global/estatística & dados numéricos , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Modelos Estatísticos , Pandemias , Medição de Risco , Reino Unido/epidemiologia , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA