Dataset Information

Social and Clinical Determinants of COVID-19 Outcomes: Modeling Real-World Data from a Pandemic Epicenter.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

As the United States continues to accumulate COVID-19 cases and deaths, and disparities persist, defining the impact of risk factors for poor outcomes across patient groups is imperative.

Objective

Our objective is to use real-world healthcare data to quantify the impact of demographic, clinical, and social determinants associated with adverse COVID-19 outcomes, to identify high-risk scenarios and dynamics of risk among racial and ethnic groups.

Design

A retrospective cohort of COVID-19 patients diagnosed between March 1 and August 20, 2020. Fully adjusted logistical regression models for hospitalization, severe disease and mortality outcomes across 1-the entire cohort and 2-within self-reported race/ethnicity groups.

Setting

Three sites of the NewYork-Presbyterian health care system serving all boroughs of New York City. Data was obtained through automated data abstraction from electronic medical records.

Participants

During the study timeframe, 110,498 individuals were tested for SARS-CoV-2 in the NewYork-Presbyterian health care system; 11,930 patients were confirmed for COVID-19 by RT-PCR or covid-19 clinical diagnosis.

Main outcomes and measures

The predictors of interest were patient race/ethnicity, and covariates included demographics, comorbidities, and census tract neighborhood socio-economic status. The outcomes of interest were COVID-19 hospitalization, severe disease, and death.

Results

Of confirmed COVID-19 patients, 4,895 were hospitalized, 1,070 developed severe disease and 1,654 suffered COVID-19 related death. Clinical factors had stronger impacts than social determinants and several showed race-group specificities, which varied among outcomes. The most significant factors in our all-patients models included: age over 80 (OR=5.78, p= 2.29×10 ^-24 ) and hypertension (OR=1.89, p=1.26×10 ^-10 ) having the highest impact on hospitalization, while Type 2 Diabetes was associated with all three outcomes (hospitalization: OR=1.48, p=1.39×10 ^-04 ; severe disease: OR=1.46, p=4.47×10 ^-09 ; mortality: OR=1.27, p=0.001). In race-specific models, COPD increased risk of hospitalization only in Non-Hispanics (NH)-Whites (OR=2.70, p=0.009). Obesity (BMI 30+) showed race-specific risk with severe disease NH-Whites (OR=1.48, p=0.038) and NH-Blacks (OR=1.77, p=0.025). For mortality, Cancer was the only risk factor in Hispanics (OR=1.97, p=0.043), and heart failure was only a risk in NH-Asians (OR=2.62, p=0.001).

Conclusions and relevance

Comorbidities were more influential on COVID-19 outcomes than social determinants, suggesting clinical factors are more predictive of adverse trajectory than social factors.

Key points

QUESTION: What is the impact of patient self-reported race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and clinical profile on COVID-19 hospitalizations, severity, and mortality?FINDINGS: In patients diagnosed with COVID-19, being over 50 years of age, having type 2 diabetes and hypertension were the most important risk factors for hospitalization and severe outcomes regardless of patient race or socioeconomic status.MEANING: In this large sample pf patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in New York City, we found that clinical comorbidity, more so than social determinants of health, was associated with important patient outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Manohar J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8043490 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAs war and famine are population level stressors that have been historically linked to menstrual cycle abnormalities, we hypothesized that the COVID-19 pandemic could similarly affect ovulation and menstruation among women.MethodologyWe conducted a retrospective cohort study examining changes in ovulation and menstruation among women using the Natural Cycles mobile tracking app. We compared de-identified cycle data from March-September 2019 (pre-pandemic) versus March-September 2020 (during pandemic) to determine differences in the proportion of users experiencing anovulation, abnormal cycle length, and prolonged menses, as well as population level changes in these parameters, while controlling for user-reported stress during the pandemic.FindingsWe analyzed data from 214,426 cycles from 18,076 app users, primarily from Great Britain (29.3%) and the United States (22.6%). The average user was 33 years of age; most held at least a university degree (79.9%). Nearly half (45.4%) reported more pandemic-related stress. Changes in average cycle and menstruation lengths were not clinically significant, remaining at 29 and 4 days, respectively. Approximately 7.7% and 19.5% of users recorded more anovulatory cycles and abnormal cycle lengths during the pandemic, respectively. Contrary to expectation, 9.6% and 19.6% recorded fewer anovulatory cycles and abnormal cycle lengths, respectively. Women self-reporting more (32.0%) and markedly more (13.6%) stress during the pandemic were not more likely to experience cycle abnormalities.ConclusionsThe COVD-19 pandemic did not induce population-level changes to ovulation and menstruation among women using a mobile app to track menstrual cycles and predict ovulation. While some women experienced abnormalities during the pandemic, this proportion was smaller than that observed prior to the pandemic. As most app users in this study were well-educated women over the age of 30 years, and from high-income countries, their experience of the COVID-19 pandemic might differ in ways that limit the generalizability of these findings.

Project description:BackgroundThe influence of SARS-CoV-2 on surgery for non-small cell lung cancer needs to be understood to inform clinical decision making during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.ObjectiveThis study reports on the 90-day rate of infection as well as the morbidity and mortality of lung surgery for cancer in a tertiary care hospital located in a pandemic epicenter.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective review of a prospective database to identify consecutive patients who underwent lung cancer resection before (January 1, 2020-March 10, 2020, group 1; 57 patients) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (March 11, 2020-June 10, 2020, group 2; 41 patients). The primary end point was the occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 infection during the first 90-days after surgery. The secondary outcome measure was 90-day perioperative morbidity and mortality.ResultsPatient characteristics were not significantly different between the groups. Ninety-day COVID-19 infection rates was 7.3% (3 out of 41) for patients undergoing an operation during the pandemic and 3.5% (2 out of 57) in patients operated on immediately before the pandemic. All patients tested positive 10 to 62 days after the index surgical procedure following hospital discharge. Four COVID-19-positive patients were symptomatic and 4 out of 5 patients required hospitalization, were men, previous or current smokers with hyperlipidemia, and underwent a sublobar resection. Univariate analysis did not identify any differences in postoperative complications before or during the COVID-19 pandemic. Ninety-day mortality was 5% (2 out of 41) for lung cancer surgery performed during the pandemic, with all deaths occurring due to COVID-19, compared with 0% (0 out of 57) mortality in patients who underwent an operation before the pandemic.ConclusionsDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, COVID-19 infections occurred in 7.3% of patients who underwent surgery for non-small cell lung cancer. In this series all infections occurred after hospital discharge. Our results suggest that COVID-19 infections occurring within 90 days of surgery portend a 40% mortality, warranting close postoperative surveillance.