Search

Background: There have been conflicting results on the association of asthma with the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Poor metabolic health has been previously associated with both severe COVID-19 and inflammation in asthma., Objectives: To examine the association between asthma and COVID-19 outcomes and whether these associations are modified by metabolic syndrome., Methods: We performed an international, observational cohort study of adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from February 2020 through October 2021. The primary outcome was hospital mortality., Results: The study included 27,660 patients from 164 hospitals, 12,114 (44%) female, with a median (interquartile range) age of 63 years (51-75). After adjusting for age, sex, smoking, race, ethnicity, geographic region, and Elixhauser comorbidity index, we found that patients with asthma were not at greater risk of hospital death when compared with patients with no chronic pulmonary disease (controls) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.90-1.04; P = .40). Patients with asthma, when compared with controls, required higher respiratory support identified by the need for supplemental oxygen (aOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.01-1.14; P = .02), high-flow nasal cannula or noninvasive mechanical ventilation (aOR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.00-1.13; P = .04), and invasive mechanical ventilation (aOR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.03-1.16; P = .003). Metabolic syndrome increased the risk of death in patients with asthma, but the magnitude of observed association was similar to controls in stratified analysis (interaction P value .24)., Conclusions: In this international cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients, asthma was not associated with mortality but was associated with increased need for respiratory support. Although metabolic dysfunction was associated with increased risks in COVID-19, these risks were similar for patients with or without asthma., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Primary hypothyroidism is a common comorbid condition, but little is known about its association with COVID-19 severity and outcomes. This study aims to identify the frequency of hypothyroidism in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 as well as describe the differences in outcomes between patients with and without pre-existing hypothyroidism using an observational, multinational registry., Methods: In an observational cohort study we enrolled patients 18 years or older, with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection between March 2020 and February 2021. The primary outcomes were (1) the disease severity defined as per the World Health Organization Scale for Clinical Improvement, which is an ordinal outcome corresponding with the highest severity level recorded during a patient's index COVID-19 hospitalization, (2) in-hospital mortality and (3) hospital-free days. Secondary outcomes were the rate of intensive care unit (ICU) admission and ICU mortality., Results: Among the 20,366 adult patients included in the study, pre-existing hypothyroidism was identified in 1616 (7.9%). The median age for the Hypothyroidism group was 70 (interquartile range: 59-80) years, and 65% were female and 67% were White. The most common comorbidities were hypertension (68%), diabetes (42%), dyslipidemia (37%) and obesity (28%). After adjusting for age, body mass index, sex, admission date in the quarter year since March 2020, race, smoking history and other comorbid conditions (coronary artery disease, hypertension, diabetes and dyslipidemia), pre-existing hypothyroidism was not associated with higher odds of severe disease using the World Health Organization disease severity index (odds ratio [OR]: 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.92, 1.13; p = .69), in-hospital mortality (OR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.92, 1.15; p = .58) or differences in hospital-free days (estimated difference 0.01 days; 95% CI: -0.45, 0.47; p = .97). Pre-existing hypothyroidism was not associated with ICU admission or ICU mortality in unadjusted as well as in adjusted analysis., Conclusions: In an international registry, hypothyroidism was identified in around 1 of every 12 adult hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Pre-existing hypothyroidism in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was not associated with higher disease severity or increased risk of mortality or ICU admissions. However, more research on the possible effects of COVID-19 on the thyroid gland and its function is needed in the future., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background Hypertension and diabetes are associated with increased COVID-19 severity. The association between level of control of these conditions and COVID-19 severity is less well understood. Methods and Results This retrospective cohort study identified adults with COVID-19, March 2020 to February 2022, in 43 US health systems in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network. Hypertension control was categorized as blood pressure (BP) <130/80, 130 to 139/80 to 89, 140 to 159/90 to 99, or ≥160/100 mm Hg, and diabetes control as glycated hemoglobin <7%, 7% to <9%, ≥9%. Adjusted, pooled logistic regression assessed associations between hypertension and diabetes control and severe COVID-19 outcomes. Among 1 494 837 adults with COVID-19, 43% had hypertension and 12% had diabetes. Among patients with hypertension, the highest baseline BP was associated with greater odds of hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.30 [95% CI, 1.23-1.37] for BP ≥160/100 versus BP <130/80), critical care (aOR, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.21-1.40]), and mechanical ventilation (aOR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.17-1.50]) but not mortality (aOR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.98-1.12]). Among patients with diabetes, the highest glycated hemoglobin was associated with greater odds of hospitalization (aOR, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.47-1.76] for glycated hemoglobin ≥9% versus <7%), critical care (aOR, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.31-1.54]), mechanical ventilation (aOR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.02-1.23]), and mortality (aOR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.09-1.27]). Black and Hispanic adults were more likely than White adults to experience severe COVID-19 outcomes, independent of comorbidity score and control of hypertension or diabetes. Conclusions Among 1.5 million patients with COVID-19, higher BP and glycated hemoglobin were associated with more severe COVID-19 outcomes. Findings suggest that adults with poorest control of hypertension or diabetes might benefit from efforts to prevent and initiate early treatment of COVID-19.

Throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there have been numerous demands on primary care practices and providers affecting work engagement and burnout, which can affect health-care delivery and patient outcomes. We determined potentially modifiable factors associated with work engagement among employees of federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) throughout Louisiana. Resilient coping, spirituality, and social support were associated with being engaged at work. FQHC employees perceiving a more chaotic work environment and those with depressive or anxiety symptoms were less likely to be engaged at work. Being engaged was associated with confidence in COVID-19 vaccine recommendation for adults., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The goal of this investigation is to assess the association between prehospital use of aspirin (ASA) and patient-centered outcomes in a large global cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients., Methods: This study utilizes data from the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study (VIRUS) Registry. Adult patients hospitalized from February 15th, 2020, to September 30th, 2021, were included. Multivariable regression analyses were utilized to assess the association between pre-hospital use of ASA and the primary outcome of overall hospital mortality., Results: 21,579 patients were included from 185 hospitals (predominantly US-based, 71.3%), with 4691 (21.7%) receiving pre-hospital ASA. Patients receiving ASA, compared to those without pre-admission ASA use, were generally older (median 70 vs. 59 years), more likely to be male (58.7 vs. 56.0%), caucasian (57.4 vs. 51.6%), and more commonly had higher rates of medical comorbidities. In multivariable analyses, patients receiving pre-hospital ASA had lower mortality (HR: 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.97, p=0.01) and reduced hazard for progression to severe disease or death (HR: 0.91, 95% CI 0.84-0.99, p=0.02) and more hospital free days (1.00 days, 95% CI 0.66-1.35, p=0.01) compared to those without pre-hospital ASA use. The overall direction and significance of the results remained the same in sensitivity analysis, after adjusting the multivariable model for time since pandemic., Conclusions: In this large international cohort, pre-hospital use of ASA was associated with a lower hazard for death in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Randomized controlled trials may be warranted to assess the utility of pre-hospital use of ASA., (Copyright © 2022 SEPAR. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

In December 2021 and early 2022, four medications received emergency use authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration for outpatient treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in patients who are at high risk for progressing to severe disease; these included nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) and molnupiravir (Lagevrio) (both oral antivirals), expanded use of remdesivir (Veklury; an intraveneous antiviral), and bebtelovimab (a monoclonal antibody [mAb]).* Reports have documented disparities in mAb treatment by race and ethnicity (1) and in oral antiviral treatment by zip code-level social vulnerability (2); however, limited data are available on racial and ethnic disparities in oral antiviral treatment. † Using electronic health record (EHR) data from 692,570 COVID-19 patients aged ≥20 years who sought medical care during January-July 2022, treatment with Paxlovid, Lagevrio, Veklury, and mAbs was assessed by race and ethnicity, overall and among high-risk patient groups. During 2022, the percentage of COVID-19 patients seeking medical care who were treated with Paxlovid increased from 0.6% in January to 20.2% in April and 34.3% in July; the other three medications were used less frequently (0.7%-5.0% in July). During April-July 2022, when Paxlovid use was highest, compared with White patients, Black or African American (Black) patients were prescribed Paxlovid 35.8% less often, multiple or other race patients 24.9% less often, American Indian or Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (AIAN/NHOPI) patients 23.1% less often, and Asian patients 19.4% less often; Hispanic patients were prescribed Paxlovid 29.9% less often than non-Hispanic patients. Racial and ethnic disparities in Paxlovid treatment were generally somewhat higher among patients at high risk for severe COVID-19, including those aged ≥50 years and those who were immunocompromised. The expansion of programs focused on equitable awareness of and access to outpatient COVID-19 treatments, as well as COVID-19 vaccination, including updated bivalent booster doses, can help protect persons most at risk for severe illness and facilitate equitable health outcomes., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. William E. Trick reports institutional support from PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network. Anuradha Paranjape reports serving as the uncompensated president of the Association of Chiefs & Leaders of General Internal Medicine. Michael D. Kappelman reports consulting fees from Abbvie, Takeda, Janssen, and Pfizer, and stock ownership in Johnson & Johnson. Joshua L. Denson reports research funding from the American Diabetes Association, the Society of Critical Care Medicine, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (Grant funding the Louisiana Clinical and Translational Science Center Roadmap Scholars Award). Thomas W. Carton and Jason P. Block report grant support from NIH, as part of the Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER) research program. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Objective: The impact of comorbidities and biomarkers on COVID-19 severity vary by sex but have not yet been verified in population-based studies. We examined the association of comorbidities, inflammatory biomarkers, and severe outcomes in men and women hospitalized for COVID-19., Design: This is a retrospective cohort analysis based on the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C). We included 574,391 adult patients admitted for COVID-19 at hospitals or emergency rooms between 01/01/2020 and 12/31/2021., Methods: We defined comorbidities at or before the first admission for COVID-19 by Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and CCI components. We used the averaged lab values taken within 15 days before or after the admission date to measure biomarkers including c-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, procalcitonin, N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide (NT proBNP), d-dimer, absolute lymphocyte counts, absolute neutrophil counts, and platelets. Our primary outcome was all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes were invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and hospital length of stay (LOS). We used logistic regression adjusted for age, race, ethnicity, visit type, and medications to assess the association of comorbidities, biomarkers, and mortality disaggregating by sex., Results: Moderate to severe liver disease, renal disease, metastatic solid tumor, and myocardial infarction were the top four fatal comorbidities among patients who were hospitalized for COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] > 2). These four comorbid conditions remained the most lethal in both sexes, with a higher magnitude of risk in women than in men (p-interaction < 0.05). Abnormal elevations of CRP, ferritin, procalcitonin, NT proBNP, neutrophil, and platelet counts, and lymphocytopenia were significantly associated with the risk of death, with procalcitonin and NT proBNP as the strongest predictors (aOR > 2). The association between the abnormal biomarkers and death was stronger in women than in men (p-interaction < 0.05)., Conclusion: There are sex differences in inpatient mortality associated with comorbidities and biomarkers. The significant impact of these clinical determinants in women with COVID-19 may be underappreciated as previous studies stressed the increased death rate in male patients that is related to comorbidities or inflammation. Our study highlights the importance and the need for sex-disaggregated research to understand the risk factors of poor outcomes and health disparities in COVID-19., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: The use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) for hypoxemic respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 are recommended by critical-care guidelines; however, apprehension about viral particle aerosolization and patient self-inflicted lung injury may have limited use. We aimed to describe hospital variation in the use and clinical outcomes of HFNC and NIV for the management of COVID-19., Methods: This was a retrospective observational study of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 who received supplemental oxygen between February 15, 2020, and April 12, 2021, across 102 international and United States hospitals by using the COVID-19 Registry. Associations of HFNC and NIV use with clinical outcomes were evaluated by using multivariable adjusted hierarchical random-effects logistic regression models. Hospital variation was characterized by using intraclass correlation and the median odds ratio., Results: Among 13,454 adults with COVID-19 who received supplemental oxygen, 8,143 (60%) received nasal cannula/face mask only, 2,859 (21%) received HFNC, 878 (7%) received NIV, 1,574 (12%) received both HFNC and NIV, with 3,640 subjects (27%) progressing to invasive ventilation. The hospital of admission contributed to 24% of the risk-adjusted variation in HFNC and 30% of the risk-adjusted variation in NIV. The median odds ratio for hospital variation of HFNC was 2.6 (95% CI 1.4-4.9) and of NIV was 3.1 (95% CI 1.2-8.1). Among 5,311 subjects who received HFNC and/or NIV, 2,772 (52%) did not receive invasive ventilation and survived to hospital discharge. Hospital-level use of HFNC or NIV were not associated with the rates of invasive ventilation or mortality., Conclusions: Hospital variation in the use of HFNC and NIV for acute respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 was great but was not associated with intubation or mortality. The wide variation and relatively low use of HFNC/NIV observed within our study signaled that implementation of increased HFNC/NIV use in patients with COVID-19 will require changes to current care delivery practices. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT04323787.)., (Copyright © 2022 by Daedalus Enterprises.)

Importance: Obesity, diabetes, and hypertension are common comorbidities in patients with severe COVID-19, yet little is known about the risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) or death in patients with COVID-19 and metabolic syndrome., Objective: To determine whether metabolic syndrome is associated with an increased risk of ARDS and death from COVID-19., Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cohort study used data from the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Respiratory Illness Universal Study collected from 181 hospitals across 26 countries from February 15, 2020, to February 18, 2021. Outcomes were compared between patients with metabolic syndrome (defined as ≥3 of the following criteria: obesity, prediabetes or diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia) and a control population without metabolic syndrome. Participants included adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 during the study period who had a completed discharge status. Data were analyzed from February 22 to October 5, 2021., Exposures: Exposures were SARS-CoV-2 infection, metabolic syndrome, obesity, prediabetes or diabetes, hypertension, and/or dyslipidemia., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included ARDS, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, need for invasive mechanical ventilation, and length of stay (LOS)., Results: Among 46 441 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 29 040 patients (mean [SD] age, 61.2 [17.8] years; 13 059 [45.0%] women and 15713 [54.1%] men; 6797 Black patients [23.4%], 5325 Hispanic patients [18.3%], and 16 507 White patients [57.8%]) met inclusion criteria. A total of 5069 patients (17.5%) with metabolic syndrome were compared with 23 971 control patients (82.5%) without metabolic syndrome. In adjusted analyses, metabolic syndrome was associated with increased risk of ICU admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.32 [95% CI, 1.14-1.53]), invasive mechanical ventilation (aOR, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.28-1.65]), ARDS (aOR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.12-1.66]), and mortality (aOR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.08-1.31]) and prolonged hospital LOS (median [IQR], 8.0 [4.2-15.8] days vs 6.8 [3.4-13.0] days; P < .001) and ICU LOS (median [IQR], 7.0 [2.8-15.0] days vs 6.4 [2.7-13.0] days; P < .001). Each additional metabolic syndrome criterion was associated with increased risk of ARDS in an additive fashion (1 criterion: 1147 patients with ARDS [10.4%]; P = .83; 2 criteria: 1191 patients with ARDS [15.3%]; P < .001; 3 criteria: 817 patients with ARDS [19.3%]; P < .001; 4 criteria: 203 patients with ARDS [24.3%]; P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that metabolic syndrome was associated with increased risks of ARDS and death in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. The association with ARDS was cumulative for each metabolic syndrome criteria present.

Objectives: To describe the outcomes of hospitalized patients in a multicenter, international coronavirus disease 2019 registry., Design: Cross-sectional observational study including coronavirus disease 2019 patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection between February 15, 2020, and November 30, 2020, according to age and type of organ support therapies., Setting: About 168 hospitals in 16 countries within the Society of Critical Care Medicine's Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness University Study coronavirus disease 2019 registry., Patients: Adult hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients who did and did not require various types and combinations of organ support (mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, vasopressors, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation)., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: Primary outcome was hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were discharge home with or without assistance and hospital length of stay. Risk-adjusted variation in hospital mortality for patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation was assessed by using multilevel models with hospitals as a random effect, adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, sex, and comorbidities. Among 20,608 patients with coronavirus disease 2019, the mean (± sd) age was 60.5 (±17), 11,1887 (54.3%) were men, 8,745 (42.4%) were admitted to the ICU, and 3,906 (19%) died in the hospital. Hospital mortality was 8.2% for patients receiving no organ support (n = 15,001). The most common organ support therapy was invasive mechanical ventilation (n = 5,005; 24.3%), with a hospital mortality of 49.8%. Mortality ranged from 40.8% among patients receiving only invasive mechanical ventilation (n =1,749) to 71.6% for patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, vasoactive drugs, and new renal replacement therapy (n = 655). Mortality was 39% for patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n = 389). Rates of discharge home ranged from 73.5% for patients who did not require organ support therapies to 29.8% for patients who only received invasive mechanical ventilation, and 8.8% for invasive mechanical ventilation, vasoactive drugs, and renal replacement; 10.8% of patients older than 74 years who received invasive mechanical ventilation were discharged home. Median hospital length of stay for patients on mechanical ventilation was 17.1 days (9.7-28 d). Adjusted interhospital variation in mortality among patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation was large (median odds ratio 1.69)., Conclusions: Coronavirus disease 2019 prognosis varies by age and level of organ support. Interhospital variation in mortality of mechanically ventilated patients was not explained by patient characteristics and requires further evaluation., Competing Interests: Drs. Kumar’s, Denson’s, Walkey’s, and Kashyap’s institutions received funding from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. Drs. Kumar’s and Kashyap’s institutions received funding from Janssen Research & Development, LLC. Drs. Kaufman’s and Denson’s institutions received funding from the Society of Critical Care Medicine. Dr. Banner-Goodspeed received partial salary support through her home institution from multiple federal research grants (including from the National Institutes of Health [NIH] and Department of Defense) as key personnel, not the principal investigator. Dr. Anderson III disclosed he is an Advisory Board member for Gift of Life Michigan. Dr. Denson received other support from American Diabetes Association Grant #7-20-COVID-53. Dr. Gajic received support for article research from Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. Dr. Walkey receives funding from the NIH/National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute grants R01HL151607, R01HL139751, and R01HL136660, Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality, R01HS026485, Boston Biomedical Innovation Center/NIH/NHLBI 5U54HL119145-07, and royalties from UptoDate. They had no influence on acquisition, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of pooled data for this article. Dr. Harhay’s institution receives funding from the NIH/National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute grant R00 HL141678, and he received support for article research from the NIH. They had no influence on acquisition, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of pooled data for this article. Dr. Gajic receives funding from the Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality R18HS 26609-2, NIH/National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute: R01HL 130881 and UG3/UH3HL 141722; Department of Defense W81XWH; American Heart Association Rapid Response Grant—coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); and royalties from Ambient Clinical Analytics. They had no influence on acquisition, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of pooled data for this article. Dr. Kashyap receives funding from the NIH/National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute: R01HL 130881 and UG3/UH3HL 141722; Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, and Janssen Research & Development, LLC; and royalties from Ambient Clinical Analytics. They had no influence on acquisition, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of pooled data for this article. Dr. St. Hill receives funding from the Minnesota Department of Health. They had no influence on acquisition, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of pooled data for this article. Dr. Denson receives funding for COVID-19 research from the American Diabetes Association grant #7-20-COVID-053, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention BroadAgency Announcement 75D301-20-R-67897, and National Institute of General Medical Sciences/NIH award U54 GM104940, which funds the Louisiana Clinical and Translational Science Center. They had no influence on acquisition, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of pooled data for this article. Dr. Martin receives funding from the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority and NIH through the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering U54 EB-027690, the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute: U54 HL-143541-02S2, the National Institute for General Medical Sciences R01 GM-104323, and the Office of the Director OT2 OD-026551; as well as funding from Genentech for clinical trial monitoring. They had no influence on acquisition, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of pooled data for this article. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Objectives: Determine if sex differences exist in clinical characteristics and outcomes of adults hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a US healthcare system., Design: Case series study., Setting and Participants: Sequentially hospitalized adults admitted for COVID-19 at two tertiary care academic hospitals in New Orleans, LA, between 27 February and 15 July 2020., Measures and Outcomes: Measures included demographics, comorbidities, presenting symptoms, and laboratory results. Outcomes included intensive care unit admission (ICU), invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), and in-hospital death., Results: We included 776 patients (median age 60.5 years; 61.4% women, 75% non-Hispanic Black). Rates of ICU, IMV, and death were similar in both sexes. In women versus men, obesity (63.8 vs 41.6%, P < 0.0001), hypertension (77.6 vs 70.1%, P = 0.02), diabetes (38.2 vs 31.8%, P = 0.06), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, 22.1 vs 15.1%, P = 0.015), and asthma (14.3 vs 6.9%, P = 0.001) were more prevalent. More women exhibited dyspnea (61.2 vs 53.7%, P = 0.04), fatigue (35.7 vs 28.5%, P = 0.03), and digestive symptoms (39.3 vs 32.8%, P = 0.06) than men. Obesity was associated with IMV at a lower BMI (> 35) in women, but the magnitude of the effect of morbid obesity (BMI ≥ 40) was similar in both sexes. COPD was associated with ICU (adjusted OR (aOR), 2.6; 95%CI, 1.5-4.3) and IMV (aOR, 1.8; 95%CI, 1.2-3.1) in women only. Diabetes (aOR, 2.6; 95%CI, 1.2-2.9), chronic kidney disease (aOR, 2.2; 95%CI, 1.3-5.2), elevated neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (aOR, 2.5; 95%CI, 1.4-4.3), and elevated ferritin (aOR, 3.6; 95%CI, 1.7-7.3) were independent predictors of death in women only. In contrast, elevated D-dimer was an independent predictor of ICU (aOR, 7.3; 95%CI, 2.7-19.5), IMV (aOR, 6.5; 95%CI, 2.1-20.4), and death (aOR, 4.5; 95%CI, 1.2-16.4) in men only., Conclusions: This study highlights sex disparities in clinical determinants of severe outcomes in COVID-19 patients that may inform management and prevention strategies to ensure gender equity.

Objective: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mortality is high in patients with hypertension, obesity, and diabetes. We examined the association between hypertension, obesity, and diabetes, individually and clustered as metabolic syndrome (MetS), and COVID-19 outcomes in patients hospitalized in New Orleans during the peak of the outbreak.Research Design and Methods: Data were collected from 287 consecutive patients with COVID-19 hospitalized at two hospitals in New Orleans, LA from 30 March to 5 April 2020. MetS was identified per World Health Organization criteria.Results: Among 287 patients (mean age 61.5 years; female, 56.8%; non-Hispanic black, 85.4%), MetS was present in 188 (66%). MetS was significantly associated with mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.42 [95% CI 1.52-7.69]), intensive care unit (ICU) (aOR 4.59 [CI 2.53-8.32]), invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) (aOR 4.71 [CI 2.50-8.87]), and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (aOR 4.70 [CI 2.25-9.82]) compared with non-MetS. Multivariable analyses of hypertension, obesity, and diabetes individually showed no association with mortality. Obesity was associated with ICU (aOR 2.18 [CI, 1.25-3.81]), ARDS (aOR 2.44 [CI 1.28-4.65]), and IMV (aOR 2.36 [CI 1.33-4.21]). Diabetes was associated with ICU (aOR 2.22 [CI 1.24-3.98]) and IMV (aOR 2.12 [CI 1.16-3.89]). Hypertension was not significantly associated with any outcome. Inflammatory biomarkers associated with MetS, CRP, and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) were associated with mortality (CRP [aOR 3.66] [CI 1.22-10.97] and LDH [aOR 3.49] [CI 1.78-6.83]).Conclusions: In predominantly black patients hospitalized for COVID-19, the clustering of hypertension, obesity, and diabetes as MetS increased the odds of mortality compared with these comorbidities individually. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) has disproportionately impacted the African American community. This study aims to identify the risk factors for severe COVID‐19 disease in African American patients. Methods: This was a retrospective cross‐sectional analysis of African American patients with COVID‐19 treated between March 12 and April 9, 2020, at a single tertiary center. The primary outcome of interest was severe disease defined as those requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Results: The study included 158 consecutive patients. The mean age was 57 years, and 61% were women. The mean (SD) of BMI was 33.2 (8.6) kg/m2. Overall, patients admitted to the ICU were older (62 vs. 55 years, P = 0.003) and had higher BMI (36.5 kg/m2 vs. 31.9 kg/m2, P = 0.002). In unadjusted and adjusted analysis, the factors most associated with ICU admission in this sample were age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.073; 95% CI: 1.033‐1.114), BMI (aOR: 1.115; 95% CI: 1.052‐1.182), and lung disease (aOR: 3.097; 95% CI: 1.137‐8.437). Conclusions: This study identified risk factors for severe disease in COVID‐19, specifically in an African American population. Further inclusive research aimed at optimizing clinical care relevant to the African American population is critical to ensure an equitable response to COVID‐19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To determine the association of prior use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASIs) with mortality and outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.Design: Retrospective observational study.Setting: Multicenter, international COVID-19 registry.Subjects: Adult hospitalized COVID-19 patients on antihypertensive agents (AHAs) prior to admission, admitted from March 31, 2020, to March 10, 2021.Interventions: None.Measurements and Main Results: Data were compared between three groups: patients on RAASIs only, other AHAs only, and those on both medications. Multivariable logistic and linear regressions were performed after controlling for prehospitalization characteristics to estimate the effect of RAASIs on mortality and other outcomes during hospitalization. Of 26,652 patients, 7,975 patients were on AHAs prior to hospitalization. Of these, 1,542 patients (19.3%) were on RAASIs only, 3,765 patients (47.2%) were on other AHAs only, and 2,668 (33.5%) patients were on both medications. Compared with those taking other AHAs only, patients on RAASIs only were younger (mean age 63.3 vs 66.9 yr; p < 0.0001), more often male (58.2% vs 52.4%; p = 0.0001) and more often White (55.1% vs 47.2%; p < 0.0001). After adjusting for age, gender, race, location, and comorbidities, patients on combination of RAASIs and other AHAs had higher in-hospital mortality than those on RAASIs only (odds ratio [OR] = 1.28; 95% CI [1.19-1.38]; p < 0.0001) and higher mortality than those on other AHAs only (OR = 1.09; 95% CI [1.03-1.15]; p = 0.0017). Patients on RAASIs only had lower mortality than those on other AHAs only (OR = 0.87; 95% CI [0.81-0.94]; p = 0.0003). Patients on ACEIs only had higher mortality compared with those on ARBs only (OR = 1.37; 95% CI [1.20-1.56]; p < 0.0001).Conclusions: Among patients hospitalized for COVID-19 who were taking AHAs, prior use of a combination of RAASIs and other AHAs was associated with higher in-hospital mortality than the use of RAASIs alone. When compared with ARBs, ACEIs were associated with significantly higher mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: To describe the outcomes of hospitalized patients in a multicenter, international coronavirus disease 2019 registry. DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study including coronavirus disease 2019 patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection between February 15, 2020, and November 30, 2020, according to age and type of organ support therapies. SETTING: About 168 hospitals in 16 countries within the Society of Critical Care Medicine's Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness University Study coronavirus disease 2019 registry. PATIENTS: Adult hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients who did and did not require various types and combinations of organ support (mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, vasopressors, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary outcome was hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were discharge home with or without assistance and hospital length of stay. Risk-adjusted variation in hospital mortality for patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation was assessed by using multilevel models with hospitals as a random effect, adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, sex, and comorbidities. Among 20,608 patients with coronavirus disease 2019, the mean (± sd) age was 60.5 (±17), 11,1887 (54.3%) were men, 8,745 (42.4%) were admitted to the ICU, and 3,906 (19%) died in the hospital. Hospital mortality was 8.2% for patients receiving no organ support (n = 15,001). The most common organ support therapy was invasive mechanical ventilation (n = 5,005; 24.3%), with a hospital mortality of 49.8%. Mortality ranged from 40.8% among patients receiving only invasive mechanical ventilation (n =1,749) to 71.6% for patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, vasoactive drugs, and new renal replacement therapy (n = 655). Mortality was 39% for patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n = 389). Rates of discharge home ranged from 73.5% for patients who did not require organ support therapies to 29.8% for patients who only received invasive mechanical ventilation, and 8.8% for invasive mechanical ventilation, vasoactive drugs, and renal replacement; 10.8% of patients older than 74 years who received invasive mechanical ventilation were discharged home. Median hospital length of stay for patients on mechanical ventilation was 17.1 days (9.7-28 d). Adjusted interhospital variation in mortality among patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation was large (median odds ratio 1.69). CONCLUSIONS: Coronavirus disease 2019 prognosis varies by age and level of organ support. Interhospital variation in mortality of mechanically ventilated patients was not explained by patient characteristics and requires further evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]