A novel haemocytometric COVID-19 prognostic score developed and validated in an observational multicentre European hospital-based study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Linssen J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7732342 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
A novel haemocytometric COVID-19 prognostic score developed and validated in an observational multicentre European hospital-based study.
Linssen Joachim J Ermens Anthony A Berrevoets Marvin M Seghezzi Michela M Previtali Giulia G van der Sar-van der Brugge Simone S Russcher Henk H Verbon Annelies A Gillis Judith J Riedl Jürgen J de Jongh Eva E Saker Jarob J Münster Marion M Munnix Imke Ca IC Dofferhof Anthonius A Scharnhorst Volkher V Ammerlaan Heidi H Deiteren Kathleen K Bakker Stephan Jl SJ Van Pelt Lucas Joost LJ Kluiters-de Hingh Yvette Y Leers Mathie Pg MP van der Ven Andre J AJ
eLife 20201126
COVID-19 induces haemocytometric changes. Complete blood count changes, including new cell activation parameters, from 982 confirmed COVID-19 adult patients from 11 European hospitals were retrospectively analysed for distinctive patterns based on age, gender, clinical severity, symptom duration, and hospital days. The observed haemocytometric patterns formed the basis to develop a multi-haemocytometric-parameter prognostic score to predict, during the first three days after presentation, which ...[more]
Similar Datasets
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.
| S-EPMC7906710 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundReliable reports on hand hygiene performance throughout the COVID-19 pandemic are lacking as most hospitals continue to rely on direct observation to measure this quality indicator. Using group electronic hand hygiene monitoring, we sought to assess the impact of COVID-19 on adherence to hand hygiene.MethodsAcross 12 Ontario hospitals (5 university and 7 community teaching hospitals), a group electronic hand hygiene monitoring system was installed before the pandemic to provide continuous measurement of hand hygiene adherence across 978 ward and 367 critical care beds. We performed an interrupted time-series study of institutional hand hygiene adherence in association with a COVID-19 inpatient census and the Ontario daily count of COVID-19 cases during a baseline period (Nov. 1, 2019, to Feb. 29, 2020), the pre-peak period of the first wave of the pandemic (Mar. 1 to Apr. 24, 2020), and the post-peak period of the first wave (Apr. 25 to July 5, 2020). We used a Poisson regression model to assess the association between the hospital COVID-19 census and institutional hand hygiene adherence while adjusting for the correlation within inpatient units.ResultsAt baseline, the rate of hand hygiene adherence was 46.0% (6 325 401 of 13 750 968 opportunities) and this improved beginning in March 2020 to a daily peak of 79.3% (66 640 of 84 026 opportunities) on Mar. 30, 2020. Each patient admitted with COVID-19 was associated with improved hand hygiene adherence (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.0621, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0619-1.0623). Increasing Ontario daily case count was similarly associated with improved hand hygiene (IRR 1.0026, 95% CI 1.0021-1.0032). After peak COVID-19 community and inpatient numbers, hand hygiene adherence declined and returned to baseline.InterpretationThe first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with significant improvement in hand hygiene adherence, measured using a group electronic monitoring system. Future research should seek to determine whether strategies that focus on health care worker perception of personal risk can achieve sustainable improvements in hand hygiene performance.
| S-EPMC8687486 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The COVID-19 pandemic has placed unprecedented strain on health-care systems. Frailty is being used in clinical decision making for patients with COVID-19, yet the prevalence and effect of frailty in people with COVID-19 is not known. In the COVID-19 in Older PEople (COPE) study we aimed to establish the prevalence of frailty in patients with COVID-19 who were admitted to hospital and investigate its association with mortality and duration of hospital stay. METHODS:This was an observational cohort study conducted at ten hospitals in the UK and one in Italy. All adults (?18 years) admitted to participating hospitals with COVID-19 were included. Patients with incomplete hospital records were excluded. The study analysed routinely generated hospital data for patients with COVID-19. Frailty was assessed by specialist COVID-19 teams using the clinical frailty scale (CFS) and patients were grouped according to their score (1-2=fit; 3-4=vulnerable, but not frail; 5-6=initial signs of frailty but with some degree of independence; and 7-9=severe or very severe frailty). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality (time from hospital admission to mortality and day-7 mortality). FINDINGS:Between Feb 27, and April 28, 2020, we enrolled 1564 patients with COVID-19. The median age was 74 years (IQR 61-83); 903 (57·7%) were men and 661 (42·3%) were women; 425 (27·2%) had died at data cutoff (April 28, 2020). 772 (49·4%) were classed as frail (CFS 5-8) and 27 (1·7%) were classed as terminally ill (CFS 9). Compared with CFS 1-2, the adjusted hazard ratios for time from hospital admission to death were 1·55 (95% CI 1·00-2·41) for CFS 3-4, 1·83 (1·15-2·91) for CFS 5-6, and 2·39 (1·50-3·81) for CFS 7-9, and adjusted odds ratios for day-7 mortality were 1·22 (95% CI 0·63-2·38) for CFS 3-4, 1·62 (0·81-3·26) for CFS 5-6, and 3·12 (1·56-6·24) for CFS 7-9. INTERPRETATION:In a large population of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, disease outcomes were better predicted by frailty than either age or comorbidity. Our results support the use of CFS to inform decision making about medical care in adult patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. FUNDING:None.
| S-EPMC7326416 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAfter the 2002/2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome outbreak, 30% of survivors exhibited persisting structural pulmonary abnormalities. The long-term pulmonary sequelae of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are yet unknown, and comprehensive clinical follow-up data are lacking.MethodsIn this prospective, multicentre, observational study, we systematically evaluated the cardiopulmonary damage in subjects recovering from COVID-19 at 60 and 100 days after confirmed diagnosis. We conducted a detailed questionnaire, clinical examination, laboratory testing, lung function analysis, echocardiography and thoracic low-dose computed tomography (CT).ResultsData from 145 COVID-19 patients were evaluated, and 41% of all subjects exhibited persistent symptoms 100 days after COVID-19 onset, with dyspnoea being most frequent (36%). Accordingly, patients still displayed an impaired lung function, with a reduced diffusing capacity in 21% of the cohort being the most prominent finding. Cardiac impairment, including a reduced left ventricular function or signs of pulmonary hypertension, was only present in a minority of subjects. CT scans unveiled persisting lung pathologies in 63% of patients, mainly consisting of bilateral ground-glass opacities and/or reticulation in the lower lung lobes, without radiological signs of pulmonary fibrosis. Sequential follow-up evaluations at 60 and 100 days after COVID-19 onset demonstrated a vast improvement of symptoms and CT abnormalities over time.ConclusionA relevant percentage of post-COVID-19 patients presented with persisting symptoms and lung function impairment along with radiological pulmonary abnormalities >100 days after the diagnosis of COVID-19. However, our results indicate a significant improvement in symptoms and cardiopulmonary status over time.
| S-EPMC7736754 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Infection by SARS-CoV2 has devastating consequences on health care systems. It is a global health priority to identify patients at risk of fatal outcomes. 1955 patients admitted to HM-Hospitales from 1 March to 10 June 2020 due to COVID-19, were were divided into two groups, 1310 belonged to the training cohort and 645 to validation cohort. Four different models were generated to predict in-hospital mortality. Following variables were included: age, sex, oxygen saturation, level of C-reactive-protein, neutrophil-to-platelet-ratio (NPR), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte-ratio (NLR) and the rate of changes of both hemogram ratios (VNLR and VNPR) during the first week after admission. The accuracy of the models in predicting in-hospital mortality were evaluated using the area under the receiver-operator-characteristic curve (AUC). AUC for models including NLR and NPR performed similarly in both cohorts: NLR 0.873 (95% CI: 0.849-0.898), NPR 0.875 (95% CI: 0.851-0.899) in training cohort and NLR 0.856 (95% CI: 0.818-0.895), NPR 0.863 (95% CI: 0.826-0.901) in validation cohort. AUC was 0.885 (95% CI: 0.885-0.919) for VNLR and 0.891 (95% CI: 0.861-0.922) for VNPR in the validation cohort. According to our results, models are useful in predicting in-hospital mortality risk due to COVID-19. The RIM Score proposed is a simple, widely available tool that can help identify patients at risk of fatal outcomes.
| S-EPMC8065669 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEffective shielding measures and virus mutations have progressively modified the disease between the waves, likewise healthcare systems have adapted to the outbreak. Our aim was to compare clinical outcomes for older people with COVID-19 in Wave 1 (W1) and Wave 2 (W2).MethodsAll data, including the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), were collected for COVID-19 consecutive patients, aged ≥65, from 13 hospitals, in W1 (February-June 2020) and W2 (October 2020-March 2021). The primary outcome was mortality (time to mortality and 28-day mortality). Data were analysed with multilevel Cox proportional hazards, linear and logistic regression models, adjusted for wave baseline demographic and clinical characteristics.ResultsData from 611 people admitted in W2 were added to and compared with data collected during W1 (N = 1340). Patients admitted in W2 were of similar age, median (interquartile range), W2 = 79 (73-84); W1 = 80 (74-86); had a greater proportion of men (59.4% vs. 53.0%); had lower 28-day mortality (29.1% vs. 40.0%), compared to W1. For combined W1-W2 sample, W2 was independently associated with improved survival: time-to-mortality adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65-0.93], 28-day mortality adjusted odds ratio = 0.80 (95% CI 0.62-1.03). W2 was associated with increased length of hospital stay aHR = 0.69 (95% CI 0.59-0.81). Patients in W2 were less frail, CFS [adjusted mean difference (aMD) = -0.50, 95% CI -0.81, -0.18], as well as presented with lower C-reactive protein (aMD = -22.52, 95% CI -32.00, -13.04).ConclusionsCOVID-19 older adults in W2 were less likely to die than during W1. Patients presented to hospital during W2 were less frail and with lower disease severity and less likely to have renal decline.
| S-EPMC9452163 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesCOVID-19 causes lung parenchymal and endothelial damage that lead to hypoxic acute respiratory failure (hARF). The influence of hARF severity on patients' outcomes is still poorly understood.DesignObservational, prospective, multicentre study.SettingThree academic hospitals in Milan (Italy) involving three respiratory high dependency units and three general wards.ParticipantsConsecutive adult hospitalised patients with a virologically confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19. Patients aged <18 years or unable to provide informed consent were excluded.InterventionsAnthropometrical, clinical characteristics and blood biomarkers were assessed within the first 24 hours from admission. hARF was graded as follows: severe (partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen ratio (PaO2/FiO2) <100 mm Hg); moderate (PaO2/FiO2 101-200 mm Hg); mild (PaO2/FiO2 201-300 mm Hg) and normal (PaO2/FiO2 >300 mm Hg).Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the assessment of clinical characteristics and in-hospital mortality based on the severity of respiratory failure. Secondary outcomes were intubation rate and application of continuous positive airway pressure during hospital stay.Results412 patients were enrolled (280 males, 68%). Median (IQR) age was 66 (55-76) years with a PaO2/FiO2 at admission of 262 (140-343) mm Hg. 50.2% had a cardiovascular disease. Prevalence of mild, moderate and severe hARF was 24.4%, 21.9% and 15.5%, respectively. In-hospital mortality proportionally increased with increasing impairment of gas exchange (p<0.001). The only independent risk factors for mortality were age ≥65 years (HR 3.41; 95% CI 2.00 to 5.78, p<0.0001), PaO2/FiO2 ratio ≤200 mm Hg (HR 3.57; 95% CI 2.20 to 5.77, p<0.0001) and respiratory failure at admission (HR 3.58; 95% CI 1.05 to 12.18, p=0.04).ConclusionsA moderate-to-severe impairment in PaO2/FiO2 was independently associated with a threefold increase in risk of in-hospital mortality. Severity of respiratory failure is useful to identify patients at higher risk of mortality.Trial registration numberNCT04307459.
| S-EPMC7549463 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background/objectivesSeveral scoring systems have been specifically developed for risk stratification in COVID-19 patients.DesignWe compared, in a cohort of confirmed COVID-19 older patients, three specifically developed scores with a previously established early warning score. Main endpoint was all causes in-hospital death.SettingThis is a single-center, retrospective observational study, conducted in the Emergency Department (ED) of an urban teaching hospital, referral center for COVID-19.ParticipantsWe reviewed the clinical records of the confirmed COVID-19 patients aged 60 years or more consecutively admitted to our ED over a 6-week period (March 1st to April 15th, 2020). A total of 210 patients, aged between 60 and 98 years were included in the study cohort.MeasurementsInternational Severe Acute Respiratory Infection Consortium Clinical Characterization Protocol-Coronavirus Clinical Characterization Consortium (ISARIC-4C) score, COVID-GRAM Critical Illness Risk Score (COVID-GRAM), quick COVID-19 Severity Index (qCSI), National Early Warning Score (NEWS).ResultsMedian age was 74 (67-82) and 133 (63.3%) were males. Globally, 42 patients (20.0%) deceased. All the score evaluated showed a fairly good predictive value with respect to in-hospital death. The ISARIC-4C score had the highest area under ROC curve (AUROC) 0.799 (0.738-0.851), followed by the COVID-GRAM 0.785 (0.723-0.838), NEWS 0.764 (0.700-0.819), and qCSI 0.749 (0.685-0.806). However, these differences were not statistical significant.ConclusionAmong the evaluated scores, the ISARIC-4C and the COVID-GRAM, calculated at ED admission, had the best performance, although the qCSI had similar efficacy by evaluating only three items. However, the NEWS, already widely validated in clinical practice, had a similar performance and could be appropriate for older patients with COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7753731 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To characterise the clinical features of children and young people admitted to hospital with laboratory confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in the UK and explore factors associated with admission to critical care, mortality, and development of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children and adolescents temporarily related to coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) (MIS-C). DESIGN:Prospective observational cohort study with rapid data gathering and near real time analysis. SETTING:260 hospitals in England, Wales, and Scotland between 17 January and 3 July 2020, with a minimum follow-up time of two weeks (to 17 July 2020). PARTICIPANTS:651 children and young people aged less than 19 years admitted to 138 hospitals and enrolled into the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emergency Infections Consortium (ISARIC) WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK study with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Admission to critical care (high dependency or intensive care), in-hospital mortality, or meeting the WHO preliminary case definition for MIS-C. RESULTS:Median age was 4.6 (interquartile range 0.3-13.7) years, 35% (225/651) were under 12 months old, and 56% (367/650) were male. 57% (330/576) were white, 12% (67/576) South Asian, and 10% (56/576) black. 42% (276/651) had at least one recorded comorbidity. A systemic mucocutaneous-enteric cluster of symptoms was identified, which encompassed the symptoms for the WHO MIS-C criteria. 18% (116/632) of children were admitted to critical care. On multivariable analysis, this was associated with age under 1 month (odds ratio 3.21, 95% confidence interval 1.36 to 7.66; P=0.008), age 10-14 years (3.23, 1.55 to 6.99; P=0.002), and black ethnicity (2.82, 1.41 to 5.57; P=0.003). Six (1%) of 627 patients died in hospital, all of whom had profound comorbidity. 11% (52/456) met the WHO MIS-C criteria, with the first patient developing symptoms in mid-March. Children meeting MIS-C criteria were older (median age 10.7 (8.3-14.1) v 1.6 (0.2-12.9) years; P<0.001) and more likely to be of non-white ethnicity (64% (29/45) v 42% (148/355); P=0.004). Children with MIS-C were five times more likely to be admitted to critical care (73% (38/52) v 15% (62/404); P<0.001). In addition to the WHO criteria, children with MIS-C were more likely to present with fatigue (51% (24/47) v 28% (86/302); P=0.004), headache (34% (16/47) v 10% (26/263); P<0.001), myalgia (34% (15/44) v 8% (21/270); P<0.001), sore throat (30% (14/47) v (12% (34/284); P=0.003), and lymphadenopathy (20% (9/46) v 3% (10/318); P<0.001) and to have a platelet count of less than 150 × 109/L (32% (16/50) v 11% (38/348); P<0.001) than children who did not have MIS-C. No deaths occurred in the MIS-C group. CONCLUSIONS:Children and young people have less severe acute covid-19 than adults. A systemic mucocutaneous-enteric symptom cluster was also identified in acute cases that shares features with MIS-C. This study provides additional evidence for refining the WHO MIS-C preliminary case definition. Children meeting the MIS-C criteria have different demographic and clinical features depending on whether they have acute SARS-CoV-2 infection (polymerase chain reaction positive) or are post-acute (antibody positive). STUDY REGISTRATION:ISRCTN66726260.
| S-EPMC7488201 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe clinical presentation of COVID-19 in patients admitted to hospital is heterogeneous. We aimed to determine whether clinical phenotypes of patients with COVID-19 can be derived from clinical data, to assess the reproducibility of these phenotypes and correlation with prognosis, and to derive and validate a simplified probabilistic model for phenotype assignment. Phenotype identification was not primarily intended as a predictive tool for mortality.MethodsIn this study, we used data from two cohorts: the COVID-19@Spain cohort, a retrospective cohort including 4035 consecutive adult patients admitted to 127 hospitals in Spain with COVID-19 between Feb 2 and March 17, 2020, and the COVID-19@HULP cohort, including 2226 consecutive adult patients admitted to a teaching hospital in Madrid between Feb 25 and April 19, 2020. The COVID-19@Spain cohort was divided into a derivation cohort, comprising 2667 randomly selected patients, and an internal validation cohort, comprising the remaining 1368 patients. The COVID-19@HULP cohort was used as an external validation cohort. A probabilistic model for phenotype assignment was derived in the derivation cohort using multinomial logistic regression and validated in the internal validation cohort. The model was also applied to the external validation cohort. 30-day mortality and other prognostic variables were assessed in the derived phenotypes and in the phenotypes assigned by the probabilistic model.FindingsThree distinct phenotypes were derived in the derivation cohort (n=2667)-phenotype A (516 [19%] patients), phenotype B (1955 [73%]) and phenotype C (196 [7%])-and reproduced in the internal validation cohort (n=1368)-phenotype A (233 [17%] patients), phenotype B (1019 [74%]), and phenotype C (116 [8%]). Patients with phenotype A were younger, were less frequently male, had mild viral symptoms, and had normal inflammatory parameters. Patients with phenotype B included more patients with obesity, lymphocytopenia, and moderately elevated inflammatory parameters. Patients with phenotype C included older patients with more comorbidities and even higher inflammatory parameters than phenotype B. We developed a simplified probabilistic model (validated in the internal validation cohort) for phenotype assignment, including 16 variables. In the derivation cohort, 30-day mortality rates were 2·5% (95% CI 1·4-4·3) for patients with phenotype A, 30·5% (28·5-32·6) for patients with phenotype B, and 60·7% (53·7-67·2) for patients with phenotype C (log-rank test p<0·0001). The predicted phenotypes in the internal validation cohort and external validation cohort showed similar mortality rates to the assigned phenotypes (internal validation cohort: 5·3% [95% CI 3·4-8·1] for phenotype A, 31·3% [28·5-34·2] for phenotype B, and 59·5% [48·8-69·3] for phenotype C; external validation cohort: 3·7% [2·0-6·4] for phenotype A, 23·7% [21·8-25·7] for phenotype B, and 51·4% [41·9-60·7] for phenotype C).InterpretationPatients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 can be classified into three phenotypes that correlate with mortality. We developed and validated a simplified tool for the probabilistic assignment of patients into phenotypes. These results might help to better classify patients for clinical management, but the pathophysiological mechanisms of the phenotypes must be investigated.FundingInstituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, and Fundación SEIMC/GeSIDA.
| S-EPMC7906623 | biostudies-literature