Dataset Information

Prior diagnoses and medications as risk factors for COVID-19 in a Los Angeles Health System.

ABSTRACT: With the continuing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic coupled with phased reopening, it is critical to identify risk factors associated with susceptibility and severity of disease in a diverse population to help shape government policies, guide clinical decision making, and prioritize future COVID-19 research. In this retrospective case-control study, we used de-identified electronic health records (EHR) from the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Health System between March 9^th, 2020 and June 14^th, 2020 to identify risk factors for COVID-19 susceptibility (severe acute respiratory distress syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) PCR test positive), inpatient admission, and severe outcomes (treatment in an intensive care unit or intubation). Of the 26,602 individuals tested by PCR for SARS-CoV-2, 992 were COVID-19 positive (3.7% of Tested), 220 were admitted in the hospital (22% of COVID-19 positive), and 77 had a severe outcome (35% of Inpatient). Consistent with previous studies, males and individuals older than 65 years old had increased risk of inpatient admission. Notably, individuals self-identifying as Hispanic or Latino constituted an increasing percentage of COVID-19 patients as disease severity escalated, comprising 24% of those testing positive, but 40% of those with a severe outcome, a disparity that remained after correcting for medical comorbidities. Cardiovascular disease, hypertension, and renal disease were premorbid risk factors present before SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing associated with COVID-19 susceptibility. Less well-established risk factors for COVID-19 susceptibility included pre-existing dementia (odds ratio (OR) 5.2 [3.2-8.3], p=2.6 x 10^-10), mental health conditions (depression OR 2.1 [1.6-2.8], p=1.1 x 10^-6) and vitamin D deficiency (OR 1.8 [1.4-2.2], p=5.7 x 10^-6). Renal diseases including end-stage renal disease and anemia due to chronic renal disease were the predominant premorbid risk factors for COVID-19 inpatient admission. Other less established risk factors for COVID-19 inpatient admission included previous renal transplant (OR 9.7 [2.8-39], p=3.2x10^-4) and disorders of the immune system (OR 6.0 [2.3, 16], p=2.7x10^-4). Prior use of oral steroid medications was associated with decreased COVID-19 positive testing risk (OR 0.61 [0.45, 0.81], p=4.3x10^-4), but increased inpatient admission risk (OR 4.5 [2.3, 8.9], p=1.8x10^-5). We did not observe that prior use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers increased the risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, being admitted to the hospital, or having a severe outcome. This study involving direct EHR extraction identified known and less well-established demographics, and prior diagnoses and medications as risk factors for COVID-19 susceptibility and inpatient admission. Knowledge of these risk factors including marked ethnic disparities observed in disease severity should guide government policies, identify at-risk populations, inform clinical decision making, and prioritize future COVID-19 research.

SUBMITTER: Chang TS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7340203 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe COVID-19 pandemic has had disproportionate effects on racial and ethnic minority communities, where preexisting clinical and social conditions amplify health and social disparities. Many of these communities report lower vaccine confidence and lower receipt of the COVID-19 vaccine. Understanding factors that influence the multifaceted decision-making process for vaccine uptake is critical for narrowing COVID-19-related disparities.ObjectiveTo examine factors that members of multiethnic communities at high risk for COVID-19 infection and morbidity report as contributing to vaccine decision-making.Design, setting, and participantsThis qualitative study used community-engaged methods to conduct virtual focus groups from November 16, 2020, to January 28, 2021, with Los Angeles County residents. Potential participants were recruited through email, video, and telephone outreach to community partner networks. Focus groups were stratified by self-identified race and ethnicity as well as age. Transcripts were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.Main outcomes and measuresThemes were categorized by contextual, individual, and vaccine-specific influences using the World Health Organization's Vaccine Hesitancy Matrix categories.ResultsA total of 13 focus groups were conducted with 70 participants (50 [71.4%] female) who self-identified as American Indian (n = 17 [24.3%]), Black/African American (n = 17 [24.3%]), Filipino/Filipina (n = 11 [15.7%]), Latino/Latina (n = 15 [21.4%]), or Pacific Islander (n = 10 [14.3%]). A total of 39 participants (55.7%) were residents from high-poverty zip codes, and 34 (48.6%) were essential workers. The resulting themes included policy implications for equitable vaccine distribution: contextual influences (unclear and unreliable information, concern for inequitable access or differential treatment, references to mistrust from unethical research studies, accessibility and accommodation barriers, eligibility uncertainty, and fears of politicization or pharmaceutical industry influence); social and group influences (inadequate exposure to trusted messengers or information, altruistic motivations, medical mistrust, and desire for autonomy); and vaccination-specific influences (need for vaccine evidence by subpopulation, misconceptions on vaccine development, allocation ambiguity, vaccination safety preferences, the importance of perceiving vaccine equity, burden of vaccine scheduling, cost uncertainty, and desire for practitioner recommendation).Conclusions and relevanceIn this qualitative study, participants reported a number of factors that affected their vaccine decision-making, including concern for inequitable vaccine access. Participants endorsed policy recommendations and strategies to promote vaccine confidence. These results suggest that support of informed deliberation and attainment of vaccine equity will require multifaceted, multilevel policy approaches that improve COVID-19 vaccine knowledge, enhance trust, and address the complex interplay of sociocultural and structural barriers to vaccination.

Project description:ImportanceDescribing the changes in trauma volume and injury patterns during the course of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic could help to inform policy development and hospital resource planning.ObjectiveTo examine trends in trauma admissions throughout Los Angeles County (LAC) during the pandemic.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cohort study, all trauma admissions to the 15 verified level 1 and level 2 trauma centers in LAC from January 1 to June 7, 2020 were reviewed. All trauma admissions from the same period in 2019 were used as historical control. For overall admissions, the study period was divided into 3 intervals based on daily admission trend analysis (January 1 through February 28, March 1 through April 9, April 10 through June 7). For the blunt trauma subgroup analysis, the study period was divided into 3 similar intervals (January 1 through February 27, February 28 through April 5, April 6 through June 7).ExposuresCOVID-19 pandemic.Main outcomes and measuresTrends in trauma admission volume and injury patterns.ResultsA total of 6777 patients in 2020 and 6937 in 2019 met inclusion criteria. Of those admitted in 2020, the median (interquartile range) age was 42 (28-61) years and 5100 (75.3%) were men. Mechanisms of injury were significantly different between the 2 years, with a higher incidence of penetrating trauma and fewer blunt injuries in 2020 compared with 2019 (penetrating: 1065 [15.7%] vs 1065 [15.4%]; blunt: 5309 [78.3%] vs 5528 [79.7%]). Overall admissions by interval in 2020 were 2681, 1684, and 2412, whereas in 2019 they were 2462, 1862, and 2613, respectively. There was a significant increase in overall admissions per week during the first interval (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.02; 95% CI, 1.002-1.04; P = .03) followed by a decrease in the second interval (IRR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.90-0.94; P < .001) and, finally, an increase in the third interval (IRR, 1.05; CI, 1.03-1.07; P < .001). On subgroup analysis, blunt admissions followed a similar pattern to overall admissions, while penetrating admissions increased throughout the study period.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, trauma centers throughout LAC experienced a significant change in injury patterns and admission trends during the COVID-19 pandemic. A transient decrease in volume was followed by a quick return to baseline levels. Trauma centers should prioritize maintaining access, capacity, and functionality during pandemics and other national emergencies.

Dataset Information

Prior diagnoses and medications as risk factors for COVID-19 in a Los Angeles Health System.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets