Dataset Information

Comparison of COVID-19 outcomes among shielded and non-shielded populations.

ABSTRACT: Many western countries used shielding (extended self-isolation) of people presumed to be at high-risk from COVID-19 to protect them and reduce healthcare demand. To investigate the effectiveness of this strategy, we linked family practitioner, prescribing, laboratory, hospital and death records and compared COVID-19 outcomes among shielded and non-shielded individuals in the West of Scotland. Of the 1.3 million population, 27,747 (2.03%) were advised to shield, and 353,085 (26.85%) were classified a priori as moderate risk. COVID-19 testing was more common in the shielded (7.01%) and moderate risk (2.03%) groups, than low risk (0.73%). Referent to low-risk, the shielded group had higher confirmed infections (RR 8.45, 95% 7.44-9.59), case-fatality (RR 5.62, 95% CI 4.47-7.07) and population mortality (RR 57.56, 95% 44.06-75.19). The moderate-risk had intermediate confirmed infections (RR 4.11, 95% CI 3.82-4.42) and population mortality (RR 25.41, 95% CI 20.36-31.71) but, due to their higher prevalence, made the largest contribution to deaths (PAF 75.30%). Age ≥ 70 years accounted for 49.55% of deaths. In conclusion, in spite of the shielding strategy, high risk individuals were at increased risk of death. Furthermore, to be effective as a population strategy, shielding criteria would have needed to be widely expanded to include other criteria, such as the elderly.

SUBMITTER: Jani BD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8316565 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of COVID-19 outcomes among shielded and non-shielded populations.

Jani Bhautesh D BD Ho Frederick K FK Lowe David J DJ Traynor Jamie P JP MacBride-Stewart Sean P SP Mark Patrick B PB Mair Frances S FS Pell Jill P JP

Scientific reports 20210727 1

Many western countries used shielding (extended self-isolation) of people presumed to be at high-risk from COVID-19 to protect them and reduce healthcare demand. To investigate the effectiveness of this strategy, we linked family practitioner, prescribing, laboratory, hospital and death records and compared COVID-19 outcomes among shielded and non-shielded individuals in the West of Scotland. Of the 1.3 million population, 27,747 (2.03%) were advised to shield, and 353,085 (26.85%) were classifi ...[more]

PMID: 34315958

Similar Datasets

Project description:Rationale: The outcomes of survivors of critical illness due to coronavirus disease (COVID-19) compared with non-COVID-19 are yet to be established. Objectives: We aimed to investigate new disability at 6 months in mechanically ventilated patients admitted to Australian ICUs with COVID-19 compared with non-COVID-19. Methods: We included critically ill patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 from two prospective observational studies. Patients were eligible if they were adult (age ⩾ 8 yr) and received ⩾24 hours of mechanical ventilation. In addition, patients with COVID-19 were eligible with a positive laboratory PCR test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Measurements and Main Results: Demographic, intervention, and hospital outcome data were obtained from electronic medical records. Survivors were contacted by telephone for functional outcomes with trained outcome assessors using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. Between March 6, 2020, and April 21, 2021, 120 critically ill patients with COVID-19, and between August 2017 and January 2019, 199 critically ill patients without COVID-19, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Patients with COVID-19 were older (median [interquartile range], 62 [55-71] vs. 58 [44-69] yr; P = 0.019) with a lower Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (17 [13-20] vs. 19 [15-23]; P = 0.011). Although duration of ventilation was longer in patients with COVID-19 than in those without COVID-19 (12 [5-19] vs. 4.8 [2.3-8.8] d; P < 0.001), 180-day mortality was similar between the groups (39/120 [32.5%] vs. 70/199 [35.2%]; P = 0.715). The incidence of death or new disability at 180 days was similar (58/93 [62.4%] vs. 99/150 [66/0%]; P = 0.583). Conclusions: At 6 months, there was no difference in new disability for patients requiring mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 compared with non-COVID-19. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04401254).

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has caused the relocation of huge financial resources to departments dedicated to infected patients, at the expense of those suffering from other pathologies.AimTo compare clinical features and outcomes in COVID-19 pneumonia and non-COVID-19 pneumonia patients.Patients and methods53 patients (35 males, mean age 61.5 years) with COVID-19 pneumonia and 50 patients (32 males, mean age 72.7 years) with non-COVID-19 pneumonia, consecutively admitted between March and May 2020 were included. Clinical, laboratory and radiological data at admission were analyzed. Duration of hospitalization and mortality rates were evaluated.ResultsAmong the non-COVID patients, mean age, presence of comorbidities (neurological diseases, chronic kidney disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), Charlson Comorbidity Index and risk factors (tobacco use and protracted length of stay in geriatric healthcare facilities) were higher than in COVID patients. The non-COVID-19 pneumonia group showed a higher (24% vs. 17%), although not statistically significant in-hospital mortality rate; the average duration of hospitalization was longer for COVID patients (30 vs. 9 days, p = .0001).ConclusionsIn the early stages of the COVID pandemic, our centre noted no statistical difference in unadjusted in-hospital mortality between COVID and non-COVID patients. Non-COVID patients had higher Charlson Comorbidity Scores, reflecting a greater disease burden in this population.Key MessagesIn March 2020, the COVID-19 disease was declared a pandemic, with enormous consequences for the organization of health systems and in terms of human lives; this has caused the relocation of huge financial resources to departments dedicated to infected patients, at the expense of those suffering from other pathologies.Few published reports have compared COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 pneumonia. In our study, performed in a geographic area with a low prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, we found few statistically significant differences in terms of clinical characteristics between the two groups analyzed.In the early stages of the COVID pandemic, our centre noted no statistical difference in unadjusted in-hospital mortality between COVID and non-COVID patients. Non-COVID patients had higher Charlson Comorbidity Scores, reflecting a greater disease burden in this population.

Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies that assessed the risk of cardiovascular outcomes in survivors of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were likely limited by lack of generalizability and selection of controls nonrepresentative of a counterfactual situation regarding COVID-19-related hospitalization. This study determined whether COVID-19 hospitalization was associated with incident cardiovascular outcomes compared to non-COVID-19 pneumonia hospitalization.MethodsNationwide population-based study conducted using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. A cohort of 132,784 inpatients with COVID-19 (October 8, 2020-September 30, 2021) and a cohort of 31,173 inpatients with non-COVID-19 pneumonia (January 1-December 31, 2019) were included. The primary outcome was the major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; a composite of myocardial infarction and stroke). Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of all outcomes of interest were estimated between inverse probability of treatment-weighted patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 pneumonia.ResultsAfter weighting, the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 pneumonia groups included 125,810 (mean [SD] age, 47.2 [17.6] years; men, 49.3%) and 28,492 patients (mean [SD] age, 48.6 [18.4] years; men, 47.2%), respectively. COVID-19 hospitalization was not associated with an increased risk of the MACE (HR, 0.84; 95% CI 0.69-1.03). However, the MACE (HR, 7.30; 95% CI 3.29-16.21), dysrhythmia (HR, 1.88; 95% CI 1.04-3.42), acute myocarditis (HR, 11.33; 95% CI 2.97-43.20), myocardial infarction (HR, 6.78; 95% CI 3.03-15.15), congestive heart failure (HR, 1.95; 95% CI 1.37-2.77), and thrombotic disease (HR, 8.26; 95% CI 4.06-16.83) risks were significantly higher in patients with COVID-19 aged 18-39 years. The findings were consistent after adjustment for preexisting cardiovascular disease. COVID-19 hospitalization conferred a higher risk of acute myocarditis (HR, 6.47; 95% CI 2.53-16.52) or deep vein thrombosis (HR, 1.97; 95% CI 1.38-2.80), regardless of vaccination status.ConclusionsHospitalized patients with COVID-19 were not at an increased risk of cardiovascular outcomes compared to patients with non-COVID-19 pneumonia. Further studies are needed to evaluate whether the increased risk of cardiovascular outcomes is confined to younger patients.

Dataset Information

Comparison of COVID-19 outcomes among shielded and non-shielded populations.

Publications

Comparison of COVID-19 outcomes among shielded and non-shielded populations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets