Dataset Information

Real-World Data on the Impact of COVID-19 on Endoscopic Procedural Delays.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The initial surge of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic prompted national recommendations to delay nonurgent endoscopic procedures. The objective of this study was to provide real-world data on the impact of COVID-19 on endoscopic procedures in a safety-net healthcare system and cancer center affiliated with a tertiary academic center.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study used a combination of electronic health record data and a prospective data tool created to track endoscopy procedures throughout COVID-19 to describe patient and procedural characteristics of endoscopic procedures delayed during the initial COVID-19 surge.

Results

Of the 480 patients identified, the median age was 57 years (interquartile range 46-66), 55% (n = 262) were male, and 59% self-identified as white. Colonoscopy was the most common type of delayed procedure (49%), followed by combined esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy (22%), and EGD alone (20%). Colorectal cancer screening was the most common indication for delayed colonoscopy (35%), and evaluation of suspected bleeding (30%) was the most common indication for delayed combined EGD and colonoscopy. To date, 46% (223/480) of delayed cases have been completed with 12 colorectal, pancreatic, and stomach cancers diagnosed. Sociodemographic factors, procedure type, and sedation type were not significantly associated with endoscopy completion. The median time to endoscopy after delayed procedure was 88 days (interquartile range 63-119) with no differences by procedure type.

Discussion

To minimize potential losses to follow-up, delayed, or missed diagnoses and to reduce progression of gastrointestinal diseases, all efforts should be used to ensure follow-up in those whose endoscopic procedures were delayed because of COVID-19.

SUBMITTER: Issaka RB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8162484 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceAs 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.ObjectiveOur 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.DesignA 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.SettingThree 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.ParticipantsDuring 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 measuresThe 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.ResultsOf 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 relevanceComorbidities were more influential on COVID-19 outcomes than social determinants, suggesting clinical factors are more predictive of adverse trajectory than social factors.Key pointsQUESTION: 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.

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.