Dataset Information

Co-infections, secondary infections, and antimicrobial use in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 during the first pandemic wave from the ISARIC WHO CCP-UK study: a multicentre, prospective cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Microbiological characterisation of co-infections and secondary infections in patients with COVID-19 is lacking, and antimicrobial use is high. We aimed to describe microbiologically confirmed co-infections and secondary infections, and antimicrobial use, in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.

Methods

The International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium (ISARIC) WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK (CCP-UK) study is an ongoing, prospective cohort study recruiting inpatients from 260 hospitals in England, Scotland, and Wales, conducted by the ISARIC Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium. Patients with a confirmed or clinician-defined high likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 infection were eligible for inclusion in the ISARIC WHO CCP-UK study. For this specific study, we excluded patients with a recorded negative SARS-CoV-2 test result and those without a recorded outcome at 28 days after admission. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, therapeutic, and outcome data were collected using a prespecified case report form. Organisms considered clinically insignificant were excluded.

Findings

We analysed data from 48 902 patients admitted to hospital between Feb 6 and June 8, 2020. The median patient age was 74 years (IQR 59-84) and 20 786 (42·6%) of 48 765 patients were female. Microbiological investigations were recorded for 8649 (17·7%) of 48 902 patients, with clinically significant COVID-19-related respiratory or bloodstream culture results recorded for 1107 patients. 762 (70·6%) of 1080 infections were secondary, occurring more than 2 days after hospital admission. Staphylococcus aureus and Haemophilus influenzae were the most common pathogens causing respiratory co-infections (diagnosed ≤2 days after admission), with Enterobacteriaceae and S aureus most common in secondary respiratory infections. Bloodstream infections were most frequently caused by Escherichia coli and S aureus. Among patients with available data, 13 390 (37·0%) of 36 145 had received antimicrobials in the community for this illness episode before hospital admission and 39 258 (85·2%) of 46 061 patients with inpatient antimicrobial data received one or more antimicrobials at some point during their admission (highest for patients in critical care). We identified frequent use of broad-spectrum agents and use of carbapenems rather than carbapenem-sparing alternatives.

Interpretation

In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, microbiologically confirmed bacterial infections are rare, and more likely to be secondary infections. Gram-negative organisms and S aureus are the predominant pathogens. The frequency and nature of antimicrobial use are concerning, but tractable targets for stewardship interventions exist.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), UK Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, UK Department for International Development, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, EU Platform for European Preparedness Against (Re-)emerging Epidemics, NIHR Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool, and NIHR HPRU in Respiratory Infections at Imperial College London.

SUBMITTER: Russell CD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8172149 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundImmunocompromised patients may be at higher risk of mortality if hospitalised with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared with immunocompetent patients. However, previous studies have been contradictory. We aimed to determine whether immunocompromised patients were at greater risk of in-hospital death and how this risk changed over the pandemic.Methods and findingsWe included patients > = 19 years with symptomatic community-acquired COVID-19 recruited to the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK prospective cohort study. We defined immunocompromise as immunosuppressant medication preadmission, cancer treatment, organ transplant, HIV, or congenital immunodeficiency. We used logistic regression to compare the risk of death in both groups, adjusting for age, sex, deprivation, ethnicity, vaccination, and comorbidities. We used Bayesian logistic regression to explore mortality over time. Between 17 January 2020 and 28 February 2022, we recruited 156,552 eligible patients, of whom 21,954 (14%) were immunocompromised. In total, 29% (n = 6,499) of immunocompromised and 21% (n = 28,608) of immunocompetent patients died in hospital. The odds of in-hospital mortality were elevated for immunocompromised patients (adjusted OR 1.44, 95% CI [1.39, 1.50], p < 0.001). Not all immunocompromising conditions had the same risk, for example, patients on active cancer treatment were less likely to have their care escalated to intensive care (adjusted OR 0.77, 95% CI [0.7, 0.85], p < 0.001) or ventilation (adjusted OR 0.65, 95% CI [0.56, 0.76], p < 0.001). However, cancer patients were more likely to die (adjusted OR 2.0, 95% CI [1.87, 2.15], p < 0.001). Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic deprivation, comorbidities, and vaccination status. As the pandemic progressed, in-hospital mortality reduced more slowly for immunocompromised patients than for immunocompetent patients. This was particularly evident with increasing age: the probability of the reduction in hospital mortality being less for immunocompromised patients aged 50 to 69 years was 88% for men and 83% for women, and for those >80 years was 99% for men and 98% for women. The study is limited by a lack of detailed drug data prior to admission, including steroid doses, meaning that we may have incorrectly categorised some immunocompromised patients as immunocompetent.ConclusionsImmunocompromised patients remain at elevated risk of death from COVID-19. Targeted measures such as additional vaccine doses, monoclonal antibodies, and nonpharmaceutical preventive interventions should be continually encouraged for this patient group.Trial registrationISRCTN 66726260.

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 is a multisystem disease and patients who survive might have in-hospital complications. These complications are likely to have important short-term and long-term consequences for patients, health-care utilisation, health-care system preparedness, and society amidst the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Our aim was to characterise the extent and effect of COVID-19 complications, particularly in those who survive, using the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK.MethodsWe did a prospective, multicentre cohort study in 302 UK health-care facilities. Adult patients aged 19 years or older, with confirmed or highly suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to COVID-19 were included in the study. The primary outcome of this study was the incidence of in-hospital complications, defined as organ-specific diagnoses occurring alone or in addition to any hallmarks of COVID-19 illness. We used multilevel logistic regression and survival models to explore associations between these outcomes and in-hospital complications, age, and pre-existing comorbidities.FindingsBetween Jan 17 and Aug 4, 2020, 80 388 patients were included in the study. Of the patients admitted to hospital for management of COVID-19, 49·7% (36 367 of 73 197) had at least one complication. The mean age of our cohort was 71·1 years (SD 18·7), with 56·0% (41 025 of 73 197) being male and 81·0% (59 289 of 73 197) having at least one comorbidity. Males and those aged older than 60 years were most likely to have a complication (aged ≥60 years: 54·5% [16 579 of 30 416] in males and 48·2% [11 707 of 24 288] in females; aged <60 years: 48·8% [5179 of 10 609] in males and 36·6% [2814 of 7689] in females). Renal (24·3%, 17 752 of 73 197), complex respiratory (18·4%, 13 486 of 73 197), and systemic (16·3%, 11 895 of 73 197) complications were the most frequent. Cardiovascular (12·3%, 8973 of 73 197), neurological (4·3%, 3115 of 73 197), and gastrointestinal or liver (0·8%, 7901 of 73 197) complications were also reported.InterpretationComplications and worse functional outcomes in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 are high, even in young, previously healthy individuals. Acute complications are associated with reduced ability to self-care at discharge, with neurological complications being associated with the worst functional outcomes. COVID-19 complications are likely to cause a substantial strain on health and social care in the coming years. These data will help in the design and provision of services aimed at the post-hospitalisation care of patients with COVID-19.FundingNational Institute for Health Research and the UK Medical Research Council.

Project description:BackgroundPrognostic models to predict the risk of clinical deterioration in acute COVID-19 cases are urgently required to inform clinical management decisions.MethodsWe developed and validated a multivariable logistic regression model for in-hospital clinical deterioration (defined as any requirement of ventilatory support or critical care, or death) among consecutively hospitalised adults with highly suspected or confirmed COVID-19 who were prospectively recruited to the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium (ISARIC4C) study across 260 hospitals in England, Scotland, and Wales. Candidate predictors that were specified a priori were considered for inclusion in the model on the basis of previous prognostic scores and emerging literature describing routinely measured biomarkers associated with COVID-19 prognosis. We used internal-external cross-validation to evaluate discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility across eight National Health Service (NHS) regions in the development cohort. We further validated the final model in held-out data from an additional NHS region (London).Findings74 944 participants (recruited between Feb 6 and Aug 26, 2020) were included, of whom 31 924 (43·2%) of 73 948 with available outcomes met the composite clinical deterioration outcome. In internal-external cross-validation in the development cohort of 66 705 participants, the selected model (comprising 11 predictors routinely measured at the point of hospital admission) showed consistent discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility across all eight NHS regions. In held-out data from London (n=8239), the model showed a similarly consistent performance (C-statistic 0·77 [95% CI 0·76 to 0·78]; calibration-in-the-large 0·00 [-0·05 to 0·05]); calibration slope 0·96 [0·91 to 1·01]), and greater net benefit than any other reproducible prognostic model.InterpretationThe 4C Deterioration model has strong potential for clinical utility and generalisability to predict clinical deterioration and inform decision making among adults hospitalised with COVID-19.FundingNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR), UK Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, Department for International Development, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, EU Platform for European Preparedness Against (Re-)emerging Epidemics, NIHR Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool, NIHR HPRU in Respiratory Infections at Imperial College London.

Project description:BackgroundPatients with severe COVID-19 have emerged as a population at high risk of invasive fungal infections (IFIs). However, to our knowledge, the prevalence of IFIs has not yet been assessed in large populations of mechanically ventilated patients. We aimed to identify the prevalence, risk factors, and mortality associated with IFIs in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 under intensive care.MethodsWe performed a national, multicentre, observational cohort study in 18 French intensive care units (ICUs). We retrospectively and prospectively enrolled adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with RT-PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and requiring mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory distress syndrome, with all demographic and clinical and biological follow-up data anonymised and collected from electronic case report forms. Patients were systematically screened for respiratory fungal microorganisms once or twice a week during the period of mechanical ventilation up to ICU discharge. The primary outcome was the prevalence of IFIs in all eligible participants with a minimum of three microbiological samples screened during ICU admission, with proven or probable (pr/pb) COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) classified according to the recent ECMM/ISHAM definitions. Secondary outcomes were risk factors of pr/pb CAPA, ICU mortality between the pr/pb CAPA and non-pr/pb CAPA groups, and associations of pr/pb CAPA and related variables with ICU mortality, identified by regression models. The MYCOVID study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04368221.FindingsBetween Feb 29 and July 9, 2020, we enrolled 565 mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19. 509 patients with at least three screening samples were analysed (mean age 59·4 years [SD 12·5], 400 [79%] men). 128 (25%) patients had 138 episodes of pr/pb or possible IFIs. 76 (15%) patients fulfilled the criteria for pr/pb CAPA. According to multivariate analysis, age older than 62 years (odds ratio [OR] 2·34 [95% CI 1·39-3·92], p=0·0013), treatment with dexamethasone and anti-IL-6 (OR 2·71 [1·12-6·56], p=0·027), and long duration of mechanical ventilation (>14 days; OR 2·16 [1·14-4·09], p=0·019) were independently associated with pr/pb CAPA. 38 (7%) patients had one or more other pr/pb IFIs: 32 (6%) had candidaemia, six (1%) had invasive mucormycosis, and one (<1%) had invasive fusariosis. Multivariate analysis of associations with death, adjusted for candidaemia, for the 509 patients identified three significant factors: age older than 62 years (hazard ratio [HR] 1·71 [95% CI 1·26-2·32], p=0·0005), solid organ transplantation (HR 2·46 [1·53-3·95], p=0·0002), and pr/pb CAPA (HR 1·45 [95% CI 1·03-2·03], p=0·033). At time of ICU discharge, survival curves showed that overall ICU mortality was significantly higher in patients with pr/pb CAPA than in those without, at 61·8% (95% CI 50·0-72·8) versus 32·1% (27·7-36·7; p<0·0001).InterpretationThis study shows the high prevalence of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis and candidaemia and high mortality associated with pr/pb CAPA in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19. These findings highlight the need for active surveillance of fungal pathogens in patients with severe COVID-19.FundingPfizer.

Project description:ObjectivesOpioid-induced respiratory depression (OIRD) and oversedation are rare but potentially devastating adverse events in hospitalised patients. We investigated which features predict an individual patient's risk of OIRD or oversedation; and developed a risk stratification tool that can be used to aid point-of-care clinical decision-making.DesignRetrospective observational study.SettingTwelve acute care hospitals in a large not-for-profit integrated delivery system.ParticipantsAll inpatients ≥18 years admitted between 1 July 2016 and 30 June 2018 who received an opioid during their stay (163 190 unique hospitalisations).Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was occurrence of sedation or respiratory depression severe enough that emergent reversal with naloxone was required, as determined from medical record review; if naloxone reversal was unsuccessful or if there was no evidence of hypoxic encephalopathy or death due to oversedation, it was not considered an oversedation event.ResultsAge, sex, body mass index, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, concurrent sedating medication, renal insufficiency, liver insufficiency, opioid naïvety, sleep apnoea and surgery were significantly associated with risk of oversedation. The strongest predictor was concurrent administration of another sedating medication (adjusted HR, 95% CI=3.88, 2.48 to 6.06); the most common such medications were benzodiazepines (29%), antidepressants (22%) and gamma-aminobutyric acid analogue (14.7%). The c-statistic for the final model was 0.755. The 24-point Oversedation Risk Criteria (ORC) score developed from the model stratifies patients as high (>20%, ≥21 points), moderate (11%-20%, 10-20 points) and low risk (≤10%, <10 points).ConclusionsThe ORC risk score identifies patients at high risk for OIRD or oversedation from routinely collected data, enabling targeted monitoring for early detection and intervention. It can also be applied to preventive strategies-for example, clinical decision support offered when concurrent prescriptions for opioids and other sedating medications are entered that shows how the chosen combination impacts the patient's risk.