Dataset Information

Shift of radiotherapy use during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic? An analysis of German inpatient data.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess the change in inpatient radiotherapy related to COVID-19 lockdown measures during the first wave of the pandemic in 2020.

Methods

We included cases hospitalized between January 1 and August 31, 2018-2020, with a primary ICD-10 diagnosis of C00-C13, C32 (head and neck cancer, HNC) and C53 (cervical cancer, CC). Data collection was conducted within the Medical Informatics Initiative. Outcomes were fractions and admissions. Controlling for decreasing hospital admissions during holidays, calendar weeks of 2018/2019 were aligned to Easter 2020. A lockdown period (LP; 16/03/2020-02/08/2020) and a return-to-normal period (RNP; 04/05/2020-02/08/2020) were defined. The study sample comprised a control (admission 2018/19) and study cohort (admission 2020). We computed weekly incidence and IR ratios from generalized linear mixed models.

Results

We included 9365 (CC: 2040, HNC: 7325) inpatient hospital admissions from 14 German university hospitals. For CC, fractions decreased by 19.97% in 2020 compared to 2018/19 in the LP. In the RNP the reduction was 28.57% (p < 0.001 for both periods). LP fractions for HNC increased by 10.38% (RNP: 9.27%; p < 0.001 for both periods). Admissions for CC decreased in both periods (LP: 10.2%, RNP: 22.14%), whereas for HNC, admissions increased (LP: 2.25%, RNP: 1.96%) in 2020. Within LP, for CC, radiotherapy admissions without brachytherapy were reduced by 23.92%, whereas surgery-related admissions increased by 20.48%. For HNC, admissions with radiotherapy increased by 13.84%, while surgery-related admissions decreased by 11.28% in the same period.

Conclusion

Related to the COVID-19 lockdown in an inpatient setting, radiotherapy for HNC treatment became a more frequently applied modality, while admissions of CC cases decreased.

SUBMITTER: Medenwald D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8739685 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn a previous study, we had investigated the intensive care course of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the first wave in Germany by calculating models for prognosticating in-hospital death with univariable and multivariable regression analysis. This study analyzed if these models were also applicable to patients with COVID-19 in the second wave.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study included 98 critical care patients with COVID-19, who had been treated at the University Medical Center Regensburg, Germany, between October 2020 and February 2021. Data collected for each patient included vital signs, dosage of catecholamines, analgosedation, anticoagulation, and antithrombotic medication, diagnostic blood tests, treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), intensive care scores, ventilator therapy, and pulmonary gas exchange. Using these data, expected mortality was calculated by means of the originally developed mathematical models, thereby testing the models for their applicability to patients in the second wave.ResultsMortality in the second-wave cohort did not significantly differ from that in the first-wave cohort (41.8% vs. 32.2%, p = 0.151). As in our previous study, individual parameters such as pH of blood or mean arterial pressure (MAP) differed significantly between survivors and non-survivors. In contrast to our previous study, however, survivors and non-survivors in this study showed significant or even highly significant differences in pulmonary gas exchange and ventilator therapy (e.g. mean and minimum values for oxygen saturation and partial pressure of oxygen, mean values for the fraction of inspired oxygen, positive expiratory pressure, tidal volume, and oxygenation ratio). ECMO therapy was more frequently administered than in the first-wave cohort. Calculations of expected mortality by means of the originally developed univariable and multivariable models showed that the use of simple cut-off values for pH, MAP, troponin, or combinations of these parameters resulted in correctly estimated outcome in approximately 75% of patients without ECMO therapy.