Socio-economic conditions affect health-related quality of life, during recovery from acute SARS-CoV-2 infection : Results from the VASCO study (VAriabili Socioeconomiche e COVID-19), on the "Surviving-COVID" cohort, from Bergamo (Italy).

BACKGROUND: Recovery from acute COVID-19 may be slow and incomplete: cases of Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID (PASC) are counted in millions, worldwide. We aimed to explore if and how the pre-existing Socio-economic-status (SES) influences such recovery. METHODS: We analyzed a database of 1536 consecutive patients from the first wave of COVID-19 in Italy (February-September 2020), previously admitted to our referral hospital, and followed-up in a dedicated multidisciplinary intervention. We excluded those seen earlier than 12 weeks (the conventional limit for a possible PASC syndrome), and those reporting a serious complication from the acute phase (possibly accounting for symptoms persistence). We studied whether the exposition to disadvantaged SES (estimated through the Italian Institute of Statistics's model - ISTAT 2017) was affecting recovery outcomes, that is: symptoms (composite endpoint, i.e. at least one among: dyspnea, fatigue, myalgia, chest pain or palpitations); Health-Related-Quality-of-Life (HRQoL, as by SF-36 scale); post-traumatic-stress-disorder (as by IES-R scale); and lung structural damage (as by impaired CO diffusion, DLCO). RESULTS: Eight-hundred and twenty-five patients were included in the analysis (median age 59 years; IQR: 50-69 years, 60.2% men), of which 499 (60.5%) were previously admitted to hospital and 27 (3.3%) to Intensive-Care Unit (ICU). Those still complaining of symptoms at follow-up were 337 (40.9%; 95%CI 37.5-42.2%), and 256 had a possible Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) (31%, 95%CI 28.7-35.1%). DLCO was reduced in 147 (19.6%, 95%CI 17.0-22.7%). In a multivariable model, disadvantaged SES was associated with a lower HRQoL, especially for items exploring physical health (Limitations in physical activities: OR = 0.65; 95%CI = 0.47 to 0.89; p = 0.008; AUC = 0.74) and Bodily pain (OR = 0.57; 95%CI = 0.40 to 0.82; p = 0.002; AUC = 0.74). We did not observe any association between SES and the other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Recovery after COVID-19 appears to be independently affected by a pre-existent socio-economic disadvantage, and clinical assessment should incorporate SES and HRQoL measurements, along with symptoms. The socioeconomic determinants of SARS-CoV-2 disease are not exclusive of the acute infection: this finding deserves further research and specific interventions.

Surviving COVID-19 in Bergamo province: a post-acute outpatient re-evaluation.

Bergamo province was badly hit by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic. We organised a public-funded, multidisciplinary follow-up programme for COVID-19 patients discharged from the emergency department or from the inpatient wards of 'Papa Giovanni XXIII' Hospital, the largest public hospital in the area. As of 31 July, the first 767 patients had completed the first post-discharge multidisciplinary assessment. Patients entered our programme at a median time of 81 days after discharge. Among them, 51.4% still complained of symptoms, most commonly fatigue and exertional dyspnoea, and 30.5% were still experiencing post-traumatic psychological consequences. Impaired lung diffusion was found in 19%. Seventeen per cent had D-dimer values two times above the threshold for diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (two unexpected and clinically silent pulmonary thrombosis were discovered by investigating striking D-dimer elevation). Survivors of COVID-19 exhibit a complex array of symptoms, whose common underlying pathology, if any, has still to be elucidated: a multidisciplinary approach is fundamental, to address the different problems and to look for effective solutions.

(123) I-2ß-carbomethoxy-3ß-(4-iodophenyl)-N-(3-fluoropropyl) nortropane single photon emission computed tomography and (123) I-metaiodobenzylguanidine myocardial scintigraphy in differentiating dementia with lewy bodies from other dementias: A comparative study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic value of striatal (123) I-2ß-carbomethoxy-3ß-(4-iodophenyl)-N-(3-fluoropropyl) nortropane ((123) I-FP-CIT) single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and (123) I-metaiodobenzylguanidine ((123) I-MIBG) myocardial scintigraphy in differentiating dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) from other dementia types. METHODS: This prospective longitudinal study included 30 patients with a clinical diagnosis of DLB and 29 patients with non-DLB dementia (Alzheimer disease, n = 16; behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia, n = 13). All patients underwent (123) I-FP-CIT SPECT and (123) I-MIBG myocardial scintigraphy within a few weeks of clinical diagnosis. All diagnoses at each center were agreed upon by the local clinician and an independent expert, both unaware of imaging data, and re-evaluated after 12 months. Each image was visually classified as either normal or abnormal by 3 independent nuclear physicians blinded to patients' clinical data. RESULTS: Overall, sensitivity and specificity to DLB were respectively 93% and 100% for (123) I-MIBG myocardial scintigraphy, and 90% and 76% for (123) I-FP-CIT SPECT. Lower specificity of striatal compared to myocardial imaging was due to decreased (123) I-FP-CIT uptake in 7 non-DLB subjects (3 with concomitant parkinsonism) who had normal (123) I-MIBG myocardial uptake. Notably, in our non-DLB group, myocardial imaging gave no false-positive readings even in those subjects (n = 7) with concurrent medical illnesses (diabetes and/or heart disease) supposed to potentially interfere with (123) I-MIBG uptake. INTERPRETATION: (123) I-FP-CIT SPECT and (123) I-MIBG myocardial scintigraphy have similar sensitivity for detecting DLB, but the latter appears to be more specific for excluding non-DLB dementias, especially when parkinsonism is the only "core feature" exhibited by the patient. Our data also indicate that the potential confounding effects of diabetes and heart disease on (123) I-MIBG myocardial scintigraphy results might have been overestimated. Ann Neurol 2016;80:368-378.

Psychological impact of COVID-19 after hospital discharge: A follow-up study on Italian recovered patients.

BACKGROUND: Since COVID-19 outbreak, clinical experience on its management during the acute phase has rapidly grown, including potential effects on the psychopathological dimension. However, still few data are available regarding the impact on survivors' mental health over the long-term. METHODS: A sample of 1457 COVID-19 patients underwent a multidisciplinary follow-up protocol, approximately 3 months after hospital discharge, including a psychological evaluation. The primary outcomes were anxiety, depression, resilience, post-traumatic symptoms, and health-related quality of life. Furthermore, we examined the potential role of hospitalization and delay in the follow-up assessment on the increased burden of illness. RESULTS: Although a general high level of resilience emerged, suggesting most patients relied on their individual and interpersonal resources to face difficulties related to the pandemic, almost one third of the sample reported signs of psychological distress over time, especially post-traumatic symptoms, with anxiety being more represented than depression. Furthermore, hospitalization - regardless of the setting of care - and promptness in follow-up evaluation were found to play a protective role on patients' recovery and mental wellbeing. LIMITATIONS: Selection bias of patients exclusively admitted to the hospital; absence of a control group; psychological assessment relying on self-reported instruments. CONCLUSIONS: The current crisis demands resilience and adjustment resources, either in the acute and post-acute phase. Thus, the clinical effort should aim at relieving the traumatic impact of such condition through timely interventions. Further investigation may address potential predictors of developing a traumatic stress response, in order to identify and promptly treat at-risk subpopulations.