Dataset Information

Assessing relative COVID-19 mortality during the second wave: a prospective Swiss population-based study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

During the first COVID-19 wave in Switzerland, relative mortality was at least eight times higher compared with the uninfected general population. We aimed to assess sex-specific and age-specific relative mortality associated with a SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis during the second wave.

Design

Prospective population-based study.

Setting

Individuals testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 after the start of the second wave on 1 October 2020 were followed up until death or administrative censoring on 31 December 2020.

Participants

5 179 740 inhabitants of Switzerland in fall 2018 aged 35-95 years (without COVID-19) and 257 288 persons tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by PCR or antigen testing during the second wave.

Primary and secondary outcome measures

The planned outcome measure was time to death from any cause, measured from the date of a SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis or 1 October in the general population. Information on confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnoses and deaths was matched by calendar time with the all-cause mortality of the general Swiss population of 2018. Proportional hazards models were used to estimate sex-specific and age-specific mortality rates and probabilities of death within 60 days.

Results

The risk of death for individuals tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the second wave in Switzerland increased at least sixfold compared with the general population. HRs, reflecting the risk attributable to a SARS-CoV-2 infection, were higher for men (1.40, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.52) and increased for each additional year of age (1.01, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.02). COVID-19 mortality was reduced by at least 20% compared with the first wave in spring 2020.

Conclusion

General mortality patterns, increased for men and older persons, were similar in spring and in fall. Absolute and relative COVID-19 mortality was smaller in fall.

Trial registration

The protocol for this study was registered on 3 December 2020 at https://osf.io/gbd6r.

SUBMITTER: Siegfried S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8491006 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveSeverity of the COVID-19 has been previously reported in terms of absolute mortality in SARS-CoV-2 positive cohorts. An assessment of mortality relative to mortality in the general population is presented.DesignRetrospective population-based study.SettingIndividual information on symptomatic confirmed SARS-CoV-2 patients and subsequent deaths from any cause were compared with the all-cause mortality in the Swiss population of 2018. Starting 23 February 2020, mortality in COVID-19 patients was monitored for 80 days and compared with the population mortality observed in the same time of year starting 23 February 2018.Participants5 102 300 inhabitants of Switzerland aged 35-95 without COVID-19 (general population in spring 2018) and 20 769 persons tested positively for COVID-19 during the first wave in spring 2020.MeasurementsSex-specific and age-specific mortality rates were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. Absolute probabilities of death were predicted and risk was assessed in terms of relative mortality by taking the ratio between the sex-specific and age-specific absolute mortality in COVID-19 patients and the corresponding mortality in the 2018 general population.ResultsAbsolute mortalities increased with age and were higher for males compared with females, both in the general population and in positively tested persons. A confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection substantially increased the probability of death across all patient groups at least eightfold. The highest relative mortality risks were observed among males and younger patients. Male COVID-19 patients exceeded the population hazard for males (HR 1.21, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.44). An additional year of age increased the population hazard in COVID-19 patients only marginally (HR 1.00, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.01).ConclusionsHealthcare professionals, decision-makers and societies are provided with an additional population-adjusted assessment of COVID-19 mortality risk. In combination with absolute measures of risk, the relative risks presented here help to develop a more comprehensive understanding of the actual impact of COVID-19.

Project description:ObjectiveProspectively validate prognostication scores, SOARS and 4C Mortality Score, derived from the COVID-19 first wave, for mortality and safe early discharge in the evolving pandemic with SARS-CoV-2 variants (B.1.1.7 replacing D614) and healthcare responses altering patient demographic and mortality.DesignProtocol-based prospective observational cohort study.SettingSingle site PREDICT and multisite ISARIC (International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium) cohorts in UK COVID-19 second wave, October 2020 to January 2021.Participants1383 PREDICT and 20 595 ISARIC SARS-CoV-2 patients.Primary outcome measuresRelevance of SOARS and 4C Mortality Score determining in-hospital mortality and safe early discharge in the evolving UK COVID-19 second wave.Results1383 (median age 67 years, IQR 52-82; mortality 24.7%) PREDICT and 20 595 (mortality 19.4%) ISARIC patient cohorts showed SOARS had area under the curve (AUC) of 0.8 and 0.74, while 4C Mortality Score had AUC of 0.83 and 0.91 for hospital mortality, in the PREDICT and ISARIC cohorts respectively, therefore, effective in evaluating safe discharge and in-hospital mortality. 19.3% (231/1195, PREDICT cohort) and 16.7% (2550/14992, ISARIC cohort) with SOARS of 0-1 were candidates for safe discharge to a virtual hospital (VH) model. SOARS implementation in the VH pathway resulted in low readmission, 11.8% (27/229) and low mortality, 0.9% (2/229). Use to prevent admission is still suboptimal, as 8.1% in the PREDICT cohort and 9.5% in the ISARIC cohort were admitted despite SOARS score of 0-1.ConclusionsSOARS and 4C Mortality Score remains valid, transforming complex clinical presentations into tangible numbers, aiding objective decision making, despite SARS-CoV-2 variants and healthcare responses altering patient demographic and mortality. Both scores, easily implemented within urgent care pathways for safe early discharge, allocate hospital resources appropriately to the pandemic's needs while enabling normal healthcare services resumption.

Project description:BackgroundIn the 2nd year of the COVID-19 pandemic, knowledge about the dynamics of the infection in the general population is still limited. Such information is essential for health planners, as many of those infected show no or only mild symptoms and thus, escape the surveillance system. We therefore aimed to describe the course of the pandemic in the Munich general population living in private households from April 2020 to January 2021.MethodsThe KoCo19 baseline study took place from April to June 2020 including 5313 participants (age 14 years and above). From November 2020 to January 2021, we could again measure SARS-CoV-2 antibody status in 4433 of the baseline participants (response 83%). Participants were offered a self-sampling kit to take a capillary blood sample (dry blood spot; DBS). Blood was analysed using the Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay (Roche). Questionnaire information on socio-demographics and potential risk factors assessed at baseline was available for all participants. In addition, follow-up information on health-risk taking behaviour and number of personal contacts outside the household (N = 2768) as well as leisure time activities (N = 1263) were collected in summer 2020.ResultsWeighted and adjusted (for specificity and sensitivity) SARS-CoV-2 sero-prevalence at follow-up was 3.6% (95% CI 2.9-4.3%) as compared to 1.8% (95% CI 1.3-3.4%) at baseline. 91% of those tested positive at baseline were also antibody-positive at follow-up. While sero-prevalence increased from early November 2020 to January 2021, no indication of geospatial clustering across the city of Munich was found, although cases clustered within households. Taking baseline result and time to follow-up into account, men and participants in the age group 20-34 years were at the highest risk of sero-positivity. In the sensitivity analyses, differences in health-risk taking behaviour, number of personal contacts and leisure time activities partly explained these differences.ConclusionThe number of citizens in Munich with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was still below 5% during the 2nd wave of the pandemic. Antibodies remained present in the majority of SARS-CoV-2 sero-positive baseline participants. Besides age and sex, potentially confounded by differences in behaviour, no major risk factors could be identified. Non-pharmaceutical public health measures are thus still important.

Project description:BackgroundNon-pharmaceutical interventions have been implemented around the world to control Covid-19 transmission. Their general effect on reducing virus transmission is proven, but they can also be negative to mental health and economies, and transmission behaviours can also change voluntarily, without mandated interventions. Their relative impact on Covid-19 attributed mortality, enabling policy selection for maximal benefit with minimal disruption, is not well established due to a lack of definitive methods.MethodsWe examined variations in timing and strictness of nine non-pharmaceutical interventions implemented in 130 countries and recorded by the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT): 1) School closing; 2) Workplace closing; 3) Cancelled public events; 4) Restrictions on gatherings; 5) Closing public transport; 6) Stay at home requirements ('Lockdown'); 7) Restrictions on internal movement; 8) International travel controls; 9) Public information campaigns. We used two time periods in the first wave of Covid-19, chosen to limit reverse causality, and fixed country policies to those implemented: i) prior to first Covid-19 death (when policymakers could not possibly be reacting to deaths in their own country); and, ii) 14-days-post first Covid-19 death (when deaths were still low, so reactive policymaking still likely to be minimal). We then examined associations with daily deaths per million in each subsequent 24-day period, which could only be affected by the intervention period, using linear and non-linear multivariable regression models. This method, therefore, exploited the known biological lag between virus transmission (which is what the policies can affect) and mortality for statistical inference.ResultsAfter adjusting, earlier and stricter school (- 1.23 daily deaths per million, 95% CI - 2.20 to - 0.27) and workplace closures (- 0.26, 95% CI - 0.46 to - 0.05) were associated with lower Covid-19 mortality rates. Other interventions were not significantly associated with differences in mortality rates across countries. Findings were robust across multiple statistical approaches.ConclusionsFocusing on 'compulsory', particularly school closing, not 'voluntary' reduction of social interactions with mandated interventions appears to have been the most effective strategy to mitigate early, wave one, Covid-19 mortality. Within 'compulsory' settings, such as schools and workplaces, less damaging interventions than closing might also be considered in future waves/epidemics.