Dataset Information

Adoption of a National Prophylactic Anticoagulation Guideline for Hospitalized Pregnant Women With COVID-19: Retrospective Cohort Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Both COVID-19 and pregnancy are associated with hypercoagulability. Due to the increased risk for thrombosis, the United States National Institute of Health's recommendation for prophylactic anticoagulant use for pregnant patients has expanded from patients hospitalized for severe COVID-19 manifestation to all patients hospitalized for the manifestation of COVID-19 (no guideline: before December 26, 2020; first update: December 27, 2022; second update: February 24, 2022-present). However, no study has evaluated this recommendation.

Objective

The objective of this study was to characterize prophylactic anticoagulant use among hospitalized pregnant people with COVID-19 from March 20, 2020, to October 19, 2022.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study in large US health care systems across 7 states. The cohort of interest was pregnant patients who were hospitalized with COVID-19, without previous coagulopathy or contraindication to anticoagulants (n=2767). The treatment group consisted of patients prescribed prophylactic dose anticoagulation between 2 days before and 14 days after COVID-19 treatment onset (n=191). The control group was patients with no anticoagulant exposure between 14 days before and 60 days after COVID-19 treatment onset (n=2534). We ascertained the use of prophylactic anticoagulants with attention to the updates in guidelines and emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. We propensity score matched the treatment and control group 1:1 on the most important features contributing to the prophylactic anticoagulant administration status classification. Outcome measures included coagulopathy, bleeding, COVID-19-related complications, and maternal-fetal health outcomes. Additionally, the inpatient anticoagulant administration rate was validated in a nationwide population from Truveta, a collective of 700 hospitals across the United States.

Results

The overall administration rate of prophylactic anticoagulants was 7% (191/2725). It was lowest after the second guideline update (no guideline: 27/262, 10%; first update: 145/1663, 8.72%; second update: 19/811, 2.3%; P<.001) and during the omicron-dominant period (Wild type: 45/549, 8.2%; Alpha: 18/129, 14%; Delta: 81/507, 16%; and Omicron: 47/1551, 3%; P<.001). Models developed on retrospective data showed that the variable most associated with the administration of inpatient prophylactic anticoagulant was comorbidities prior to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The patients who were administered prophylactic anticoagulant were also more likely to receive supplementary oxygen (57/191, 30% vs 9/188, 5%; P<.001). There was no statistical difference in a new diagnosis of coagulopathy, bleeding, or maternal-fetal health outcomes between those who received treatment and the matched control group.

Conclusions

Most hospitalized pregnant patients with COVID-19 did not receive prophylactic anticoagulants across health care systems as recommended by guidelines. Guideline-recommended treatment was administered more frequently to patients with greater COVID-19 illness severity. Given the low rate of administration and differences between treated and untreated cohorts, efficacy could not be assessed.

SUBMITTER: Hwang YM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10389076 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Adoption of a National Prophylactic Anticoagulation Guideline for Hospitalized Pregnant Women With COVID-19: Retrospective Cohort Study.

Hwang Yeon-Mi YM Piekos Samantha S Sorensen Tanya T Hood Leroy L Hadlock Jennifer J

JMIR public health and surveillance 20230728

<h4>Background</h4>Both COVID-19 and pregnancy are associated with hypercoagulability. Due to the increased risk for thrombosis, the United States National Institute of Health's recommendation for prophylactic anticoagulant use for pregnant patients has expanded from patients hospitalized for severe COVID-19 manifestation to all patients hospitalized for the manifestation of COVID-19 (no guideline: before December 26, 2020; first update: December 27, 2022; second update: February 24, 2022-presen ...[more]

PMID: 37311123

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe need for safe and efficient dissemination of minimally invasive approach in liver surgery is among the current challenges for hepatobiliary surgeons. After the stage of innovators and pioneers, the following countries should adopt a laparoscopic approach. The aim of this study was to assess the national experience and trend in implementing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in Poland.Materials and methodsA national registry of LLR performed in Poland was established in June 2020. All LLR cases performed before were included retrospectively, followed by prospectively collected new cases. Baseline characteristics, preoperative and intraoperative data, short-term results and long-term follow-up were recorded.ResultsSince 2010 up to the end of 2022 there were 718 LLRs performed in Poland. The national rate of laparoscopic approach has gradually increased since 2017 (P<0.001), reaching the rate of 11.7% in 2022. There were 443 (61.7%), 107 (14.9%) and 168 (23.4%) LLRs performed in accordance to increasing grades of difficulty. The move towards more demanding cases had an increasing trend over the years (P<0.001). Total intraoperative adverse event and postoperative severe complications rates were estimated for 13.5% (n=97) and 6.7% (n=48), respectively. 30-day reoperation, readmission and postoperative mortality rates were 3.6% (n=26), 2.8% (n=20) and 0.8% (n=6), respectively. While the R0 resection margin was assessed in 643 (89.6%) cases, the total textbook outcomes (TO) were achieved in 525 (74.5%) cases. Overcoming the learning curve of 60 LLRs, resulted in an increasing TO rate from 72.3% to 80.6% (P=0.024).ConclusionIt is the first national analysis of a laparoscopic approach in liver surgery in Poland. An increasing trend of minimizing invasiveness in liver resection has been observed. Responsible selection of cases in accordance with difficulty may provide results within global benchmark values and textbook outcomes already during the learning curve.

Project description:BackgroundTo the best of our knowledge, no study has exhaustively evaluated the association between maternal morbidities and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the first wave of the pandemic in pregnant women. We investigated, in natural conceptions and assisted reproductive technique (ART) pregnancies, whether maternal morbidities were more frequent in pregnant women with COVID-19 diagnosis compared to pregnant women without COVID-19 diagnosis during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods and findingsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data in a national cohort of all hospitalizations for births ≥22 weeks of gestation in France from January to June 2020 using the French national hospitalization database (PMSI). Pregnant women with COVID-19 were identified if they had been recorded in the database using the ICD-10 (International Classification of Disease) code for presence of a hospitalization for COVID-19. A total of 244,645 births were included, of which 874 (0.36%) in the COVID-19 group. Maternal morbidities and adverse obstetrical outcomes among those with or without COVID-19 were analyzed with a multivariable logistic regression model adjusted on patient characteristics. Among pregnant women, older age (31.1 (±5.9) years old versus 30.5 (±5.4) years old, respectively, p < 0.001), obesity (0.7% versus 0.3%, respectively, p < 0.001), multiple pregnancy (0.7% versus 0.4%, respectively, p < 0.001), and history of hypertension (0.9% versus 0.3%, respectively, p < 0.001) were more frequent with COVID-19 diagnosis. Active smoking (0.2% versus 0.4%, respectively, p < 0.001) and primiparity (0.3% versus 0.4%, respectively, p < 0.03) were less frequent with COVID-19 diagnosis. Frequency of ART conception was not different between those with and without COVID-19 diagnosis (p = 0.28). When compared to the non-COVID-19 group, women in the COVID-19 group had a higher frequency of admission to ICU (5.9% versus 0.1%, p < 0.001), mortality (0.2% versus 0.005%, p < 0.001), preeclampsia/eclampsia (4.8% versus 2.2%, p < 0.001), gestational hypertension (2.3% versus 1.3%, p < 0.03), postpartum hemorrhage (10.0% versus 5.7%, p < 0.001), preterm birth at <37 weeks of gestation (16.7% versus 7.1%, p < 0.001), <32 weeks of gestation (2.2% versus 0.8%, p < 0.001), <28 weeks of gestation (2.4% versus 0.8%, p < 0.001), induced preterm birth (5.4% versus 1.4%, p < 0.001), spontaneous preterm birth (11.3% versus 5.7%, p < 0.001), fetal distress (33.0% versus 26.0%, p < 0.001), and cesarean section (33.0% versus 20.2%, p < 0.001). Rates of pregnancy terminations ≥22 weeks of gestation, stillbirths, gestational diabetes, placenta praevia, and placenta abruption were not significantly different between the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 groups. The number of venous thromboembolic events was too low to perform statistical analysis. A limitation of this study relies in the possibility that asymptomatic infected women were not systematically detected.ConclusionsWe observed an increased frequency of pregnant women with maternal morbidities and diagnosis of COVID-19 compared to pregnant women without COVID-19. It appears essential to be aware of this, notably in populations at known risk of developing a more severe form of infection or obstetrical morbidities and in order for obstetrical units to better inform pregnant women and provide the best care. Although causality cannot be determined from these associations, these results may be in line with recent recommendations in favor of vaccination for pregnant women.

Project description:ImportanceDeaths among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are partially attributed to venous thromboembolism and arterial thromboses. Anticoagulants prevent thrombosis formation, possess anti-inflammatory and anti-viral properties, and may be particularly effective for treating patients with COVID-19.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether initiation of prophylactic anticoagulation within 24 hours of admission is associated with decreased risk of death among patients hospitalized with COVID-19.DesignObservational cohort study.SettingNationwide cohort of patients receiving care in the Department of Veterans Affairs, the largest integrated healthcare system in the United States.ParticipantsAll patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection March 1 to July 31, 2020, without a history of therapeutic anticoagulation.ExposuresProphylactic doses of subcutaneous heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin, or direct oral anticoagulants.Main outcomes and measures30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes: inpatient mortality and initiating therapeutic anticoagulation.ResultsOf 4,297 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 3,627 (84.4%) received prophylactic anticoagulation within 24 hours of admission. More than 99% (n=3,600) received subcutaneous heparin or enoxaparin. We observed 622 deaths within 30 days of admission, 513 among those who received prophylactic anticoagulation. Most deaths (510/622, 82%) occurred during hospitalization. In inverse probability of treatment weighted analyses, cumulative adjusted incidence of mortality at 30 days was 14.3% (95% CI 13.1-15.5) among those receiving prophylactic anticoagulation and 18.7% (95% CI 15.1-22.9) among those who did not. Compared to patients who did not receive prophylactic anticoagulation, those who did had a 27% decreased risk for 30-day mortality (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.66-0.81). Similar associations were found for inpatient mortality and initiating therapeutic anticoagulation. Quantitative bias analysis demonstrated that results were robust to unmeasured confounding (e-value lower 95% CI 1.77). Results persisted in a number of sensitivity analyses.Conclusions and relevanceEarly initiation of prophylactic anticoagulation among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 was associated with a decreased risk of mortality. These findings provide strong real-world evidence to support guidelines recommending the use of prophylactic anticoagulation as initial therapy for COVID-19 patients upon hospital admission.

Project description:We evaluated the impact of the 2011 Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society/Infectious Diseases Society of America pneumonia guideline and hospital-level implementation efforts on antibiotic prescribing for children hospitalized with pneumonia. We assessed inpatient antibiotic prescribing for pneumonia at 28 children's hospitals between August 2009 and March 2015. Each hospital was also surveyed regarding local implementation efforts targeting antibiotic prescribing and organizational readiness to adopt guideline recommendations. To estimate guideline impact, we used segmented linear regression to compare the proportion of children receiving penicillins in March 2015 with the expected proportion at this same time point had the guideline not been published based on a projection of a preguideline trend. A similar approach was used to estimate the short-term (6-month) impact of local implementation efforts. The correlations between organizational readiness and the impact of the guideline were estimated by using Pearson's correlation coefficient. Before guideline publication, penicillin prescribing was rare (<10%). After publication, an absolute increase in penicillin use was observed (27.6% [95% confidence interval: 23.7%-31.5%]) by March 2015. Among hospitals with local implementation efforts (n = 20, 71%), the median increase was 29.5% (interquartile range: 19.6%-39.1%) compared with 20.1% (interquartile rage: 9.5%-44.5%) among hospitals without such activities (P = .51). The independent, short-term impact of local implementation efforts was similar in magnitude to that of the national guideline. Organizational readiness was not correlated with prescribing changes. The publication of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society/Infectious Diseases Society of America guideline was associated with sustained increases in the use of penicillins for children hospitalized with pneumonia. Local implementation efforts may have enhanced guideline adoption and appeared more relevant than hospitals' organizational readiness to change.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare hospitalized reproductive age women with COVID-19 who were pregnant, puerperal, or neither one nor the other in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics and disease progression using Brazilian epidemiological data.MethodsA retrospective analysis of the records of the Information System of the Epidemiological Surveillance of Influenza of the Health Ministry of Brazil was performed. It included the data of female patients aged 10 to 49 years hospitalized because of severe COVID-19 disease (RT-PCR+ for SARS-CoV-2), from February 17, 2020 to January 02, 2021. They were separated into 3 groups: pregnant, puerperal, and neither pregnant nor puerperal. General comparisons and then adjustments for confounding variables (propensity score matching [PSM]) were made, using demographic and clinical characteristics, disease progression (admission to the intensive care unit [ICU] and invasive or noninvasive ventilatory support), and outcome (cure or death). Deaths were analyzed in each group according to comorbidities, invasive or noninvasive ventilatory support, and admission to the ICU.ResultsAs many as 40,640 reproductive age women hospitalized for COVID-19 were identified: 3,372 were pregnant, 794 were puerperal, and 36,474 were neither pregnant nor puerperal. Groups were significantly different in terms of demographic data and comorbidities (p<0.0001). Pregnant and puerperal women were less likely to be symptomatic than the women who were neither one nor the other (72.1%, 69.7% and 88.8%, respectively). Pregnant women, however, had a higher frequency of anosmia, and ageusia than the others. After PSM, puerperal women had a worse prognosis than pregnant women with respect to admission to the ICU, invasive ventilatory support, and death, with OR (95% CI) 1.97 (1.55 - 2.50), 2.71 (1.78 - 4.13), and 2.51 (1.79 - 3.52), respectively.ConclusionPuerperal women were at a higher risk for serious outcomes (need for the ICU, need for invasive and noninvasive ventilatory support, and death) than pregnant women.

Dataset Information

Adoption of a National Prophylactic Anticoagulation Guideline for Hospitalized Pregnant Women With COVID-19: Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Adoption of a National Prophylactic Anticoagulation Guideline for Hospitalized Pregnant Women With COVID-19: Retrospective Cohort Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets