Dataset Information

Clinical Mortality in a Large COVID-19 Cohort: Observational Study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Northwell Health, an integrated health system in New York, has treated more than 15,000 inpatients with COVID-19 at the US epicenter of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. OBJECTIVE:We describe the demographic characteristics of patients who died of COVID-19, observation of frequent rapid response team/cardiac arrest (RRT/CA) calls for non-intensive care unit (ICU) patients, and factors that contributed to RRT/CA calls. METHODS:A team of registered nurses reviewed the medical records of inpatients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 via polymerase chain reaction before or on admission and who died between March 13 (first Northwell Health inpatient expiration) and April 30, 2020, at 15 Northwell Health hospitals. The findings for these patients were abstracted into a database and statistically analyzed. RESULTS:Of 2634 patients who died of COVID-19, 1478 (56.1%) had oxygen saturation levels ?90% on presentation and required no respiratory support. At least one RRT/CA was called on 1112/2634 patients (42.2%) at a non-ICU level of care. Before the RRT/CA call, the most recent oxygen saturation levels for 852/1112 (76.6%) of these non-ICU patients were at least 90%. At the time the RRT/CA was called, 479/1112 patients (43.1%) had an oxygen saturation of <80%. CONCLUSIONS:This study represents one of the largest reviewed cohorts of mortality that also captures data in nonstructured fields. Approximately 50% of deaths occurred at a non-ICU level of care despite admission to the appropriate care setting with normal staffing. The data imply a sudden, unexpected deterioration in respiratory status requiring RRT/CA in a large number of non-ICU patients. Patients admitted at a non-ICU level of care suffered rapid clinical deterioration, often with a sudden decrease in oxygen saturation. These patients could benefit from additional monitoring (eg, continuous central oxygenation saturation), although this approach warrants further study.

SUBMITTER: Jarrett M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7537718 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical Mortality in a Large COVID-19 Cohort: Observational Study.

Jarrett Mark M Schultz Susanne S Lyall Julie J Wang Jason J Stier Lori L De Geronimo Marcella M Nelson Karen K

Journal of medical Internet research 20200925 9

<h4>Background</h4>Northwell Health, an integrated health system in New York, has treated more than 15,000 inpatients with COVID-19 at the US epicenter of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.<h4>Objective</h4>We describe the demographic characteristics of patients who died of COVID-19, observation of frequent rapid response team/cardiac arrest (RRT/CA) calls for non-intensive care unit (ICU) patients, and factors that contributed to RRT/CA calls.<h4>Methods</h4>A team of registered nurses reviewed the medic ...[more]

PMID: 32930099

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIt is important to know if mortality among hospitalised COVID-19 patients has changed as the pandemic has progressed. The aim of this study was to describe the dynamics over time of mortality among patients hospitalised for COVID-19 in Sweden, using nationwide data compiled by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare.MethodsObservational cohort study where all patients hospitalised in Sweden between March 1 and September 30, 2020, with SARS-CoV-2 RNA positivity 14 days before to 5 days after admission and a discharge code for COVID-19 were included. Outcome was 60-day all-cause mortality. Patients were categorised according to month of hospital admission. Poisson regression was used to estimate the relative risk of death by month of admission, adjusting for, age, sex, comorbidities, care dependency, country of birth, healthcare region, and Simplified Acute Physiology, version 3 (patients in intensive care units; ICU).FindingsA total of 17,140 patients were included, of which 2943 died within 60 days of admission. The overall 60-day mortality was thus 17·2% (95% CI, 16·6%-17·7%), and it decreased from 24·7% (95% CI, 23·0%-26·5%) in March to 10·4% (95% CI, 8·9%-12·1%) post-wave (July-September). Adjusted relative risk (RR) of death was 0·46 (95% CI, 0·39-0·54) post-wave, using March as reference. Corresponding RR for patients not admitted to ICU and those admitted to ICU were 0·49 (95% CI, 0·42-0·59) and 0·49 (95% CI, 0·33-0·72), respectively. The proportion of patients admitted to ICU decreased from 19·4% (95% CI, 17·9%-21·1%) in the March cohort to 8·9% (95% CI, 7·5%-10·6%) post-wave.InterpretationThere was a gradual decline in mortality during the spring of 2020 in Swedish hospitalised COVID-19 patients, independent of baseline patient characteristics. Future research is needed to explain the reasons for this decline. The changing COVID-19 mortality should be taken into account when management and results of studies from the first pandemic wave are evaluated.FundingThis study was funded by Sweden's National Board of Health and Welfare.

Project description:BackgroundSince December 2019, an outbreak of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov-2) initially emerged in Wuhan, China, and has spread worldwide now. Clinical features of patients with COVID-19 have been described. However, risk factors leading to in-hospital deterioration and poor prognosis in COVID-19 patients with severe disease have not been well identified.MethodsIn this retrospective, single-center cohort study, 1190 adult inpatients (≥ 18 years old) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and determined outcomes (discharged or died) were included from Wuhan Infectious Disease Hospital from December 29, 2019 to February 28, 2020. The final follow-up date was March 2, 2020. Clinical data including characteristics, laboratory and imaging information as well as treatments were extracted from electronic medical records and compared. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to explore the potential predictors associated with in-hospital deterioration and death.Results1190 patients with confirmed COVID-19 were included. Their median age was 57 years (interquartile range 47-67 years). Two hundred and sixty-one patients (22%) developed a severe illness after admission. Multivariable logistic regression demonstrated that higher SOFA score (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.22-1.43, per score increase, p < 0.001 for deterioration and OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.11-1.53, per score increase, p = 0.001 for death), lymphocytopenia (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.13-2.89 p = 0.013 for deterioration; OR 4.44, 95% CI 1.26-15.87, p = 0.021 for death) on admission were independent risk factors for in-hospital deterioration from not severe to severe disease and for death in severe patients. On admission D-dimer greater than 1 μg/L (OR 3.28, 95% CI 1.19-9.04, p = 0.021), leukocytopenia (OR 5.10, 95% CI 1.25-20.78), thrombocytopenia (OR 8.37, 95% CI 2.04-34.44) and history of diabetes (OR 11.16, 95% CI 1.87-66.57, p = 0.008) were also associated with higher risks of in-hospital death in severe COVID-19 patients. Shorter time interval from illness onset to non-invasive mechanical ventilation in the survivors with severe disease was observed compared with non-survivors (10.5 days, IQR 9.25-11.0 vs. 16.0 days, IQR 11.0-19.0 days, p = 0.030). Treatment with glucocorticoids increased the risk of progression from not severe to severe disease (OR 3.79, 95% CI 2.39-6.01, p < 0.001). Administration of antiviral drugs especially oseltamivir or ganciclovir is associated with a decreased risk of death in severe patients (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.05-0.64, p < 0.001).ConclusionsHigh SOFA score and lymphocytopenia on admission could predict that not severe patients would develop severe disease in-hospital. On admission elevated D-dimer, leukocytopenia, thrombocytopenia and diabetes were independent risk factors of in-hospital death in severe patients with COVID-19. Administration of oseltamivir or ganciclovir might be beneficial for reducing mortality in severe patients.

Project description:Data on residual clinical damage after Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) are lacking. The aims of this study were to investigate whether COVID-19 leaves behind residual dysfunction, and identify patients who might benefit from post-discharge monitoring. All patients aged ?18 years admitted to the Emergency Department (ED) for COVID-19, and evaluated at post-discharge follow-up between 7 April and 7 May, 2020, were enrolled. Primary outcome was need of follow-up, defined as the presence at follow-up of at least one among: respiratory rate (RR) >20 breaths/min, uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) requiring therapeutic change, moderate to very severe dyspnoea, malnutrition, or new-onset cognitive impairment, according to validated scores. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) served as secondary outcome. 185 patients were included. Median [interquartile range] time from hospital discharge to follow-up was 23 [20-29] days. 109 (58.9%) patients needed follow-up. At follow-up evaluation, 58 (31.3%) patients were dyspnoeic, 41 (22.2%) tachypnoeic, 10 (5.4%) malnourished, 106 (57.3%) at risk for malnutrition. Forty (21.6%) patients had uncontrolled BP requiring therapeutic change, and 47 (25.4%) new-onset cognitive impairment. PTSD was observed in 41 (22.2%) patients. At regression tree analysis, the ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) and body mass index (BMI) at ED presentation, and age emerged as independent predictors of the need of follow-up. Patients with PaO2/FiO2 <324 and BMI ?33 Kg/m2 had the highest odds to require follow-up. Among hospitalised patients, age ?63 years, or age <63 plus non-invasive ventilation or diabetes identified those with the highest probability to need follow-up. PTSD was independently predicted by female gender and hospitalisation, the latter being protective (odds ratio, OR, 4.03, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.76 to 9.47, p 0.0011; OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.92, p 0.033, respectively). COVID-19 leaves behind physical and psychological dysfunctions. Follow-up programmes should be implemented for selected patients.

Project description:BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, the scarcity of resources has necessitated triage of critical care for patients with the disease. In patients aged 65 years and older, triage decisions are regularly based on degree of frailty measured by the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). However, the CFS could also be useful in patients younger than 65 years. We aimed to examine the association between CFS score and hospital mortality and between CFS score and admission to intensive care in adult patients of all ages with COVID-19 across Europe.MethodsThis analysis was part of the COVID Medication (COMET) study, an international, multicentre, retrospective observational cohort study in 63 hospitals in 11 countries in Europe. Eligible patients were aged 18 years and older, had been admitted to hospital, and either tested positive by PCR for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or were judged to have a high clinical likelihood of having SARS-CoV-2 infection by the local COVID-19 expert team. CFS was used to assess level of frailty: fit (CFS1-3), mildly frail (CFS4-5), or frail (CFS6-9). The primary outcome was hospital mortality. The secondary outcome was admission to intensive care. Data were analysed using a multivariable binary logistic regression model adjusted for covariates (age, sex, number of drugs prescribed, and type of drug class as a proxy for comorbidities).FindingsBetween March 30 and July 15, 2020, 2434 patients (median age 68 years [IQR 55-77]; 1480 [61%] men, 954 [30%] women) had CFS scores available and were included in the analyses. In the total sample and in patients aged 65 years and older, frail patients and mildly frail patients had a significantly higher risk of hospital mortality than fit patients (total sample: CFS6-9 vs CFS1-3 odds ratio [OR] 2·71 [95% CI 2·04-3·60], p<0·0001 and CFS4-5 vs CFS1-3 OR 1·54 [1·16-2·06], p=0·0030; age ≥65 years: CFS6-9 vs CFS1-3 OR 2·90 [2·12-3·97], p<0·0001 and CFS4-5 vs CFS1-3 OR 1·64 [1·20-2·25], p=0·0020). In patients younger than 65 years, an increased hospital mortality risk was only observed in frail patients (CFS6-9 vs CFS1-3 OR 2·22 [1·08-4·57], p=0·030; CFS4-5 vs CFS1-3 OR 1·08 [0·48-2·39], p=0·86). Frail patients had a higher incidence of admission to intensive care than fit patients (CFS6-9 vs CFS1-3 OR 1·54 [1·21-1·97], p=0·0010), whereas mildly frail patients had a lower incidence than fit patients (CFS4-5 vs CFS1-3 OR 0·71 [0·55-0·92], p=0·0090). Among patients younger than 65 years, frail patients had an increased incidence of admission to intensive care (CFS6-9 vs CFS1-3 OR 2·96 [1·98-4·43], p<0·0001), whereas mildly frail patients had no significant difference in incidence compared with fit patients (CFS4-5 vs CFS1-3 OR 0·93 [0·63-1·38], p=0·72). Among patients aged 65 years and older, frail patients had no significant difference in the incidence of admission to intensive care compared with fit patients (CFS6-9 vs CFS1-3 OR 1·27 [0·92-1·75], p=0·14), whereas mildly frail patients had a lower incidence than fit patients (CFS4-5 vs CFS1-3 OR 0·66 [0·47-0·93], p=0·018).InterpretationThe results of this study suggest that CFS score is a suitable risk marker for hospital mortality in adult patients with COVID-19. However, treatment decisions based on the CFS in patients younger than 65 years should be made with caution.FundingLOEY Foundation.

Dataset Information

Clinical Mortality in a Large COVID-19 Cohort: Observational Study.

Publications

Clinical Mortality in a Large COVID-19 Cohort: Observational Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets