Background: Understanding the factors associated with disease severity and mortality in Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is imperative to effectively triage patients. We performed a systematic review to determine the demographic, clinical, laboratory and radiological factors associated with severity and mortality in COVID-19.Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase and WHO database for English language articles from inception until May 8, 2020. We included Observational studies with direct comparison of clinical characteristics between a) patients who died and those who survived or b) patients with severe disease and those without severe disease. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two authors independently.Results: Among 15680 articles from the literature search, 109 articles were included in the analysis. The risk of mortality was higher in patients with increasing age, male gender (RR 1.45, 95%CI 1.23–1.71), dyspnea (RR 2.55, 95%CI 1.88–2.46), diabetes (RR 1.59, 95%CI 1.41–1.78), hypertension (RR 1.90, 95%CI 1.69–2.15). Congestive heart failure (OR 4.76, 95%CI 1.34–16.97), hilar lymphadenopathy (OR 8.34, 95%CI 2.57–27.08), bilateral lung involvement (OR 4.86, 95%CI 3.19–7.39) and reticular pattern (OR 5.54, 95%CI 1.24–24.67) were associated with severe disease. Clinically relevant cut-offs for leukocytosis(>10.0 x10⁹/L), lymphopenia(< 1.1 x10⁹/L), elevated C-reactive protein(>100mg/L), LDH(>250U/L) and D-dimer(>1mg/L) had higher odds of severe disease and greater risk of mortality.Conclusion: Knowledge of the factors associated of disease severity and mortality identified in our study may assist in clinical decision-making and critical-care resource allocation for patients with COVID-19.

The use of social media to supplement resident medical education - the SMART-ME initiative

Rationale: Individual socioeconomic status has been shown to influence the outcomes of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, contextual factors may also play a role. The objective of this study is to evaluate the association between neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage measured by the area deprivation index (ADI) and COPD-related outcomes. Methods: Residential addresses of SubPopulations and InteRmediate Outcome Measures in COPD Study (SPIROMICS) subjects with COPD (FEV₁/FVC < 0.70) at baseline were geocoded and linked to their respective ADI national ranking score at the census block group level. The associations between the ADI and COPD-related outcomes were evaluated by examining the contrast between participants living in the most-disadvantaged (top quintile) to the least-disadvantaged (bottom quintile) neighborhood. Regression models included adjustment for individual-level demographics, socioeconomic variables (personal income, education), exposures (smoking status, packs per year, occupational exposures), clinical characteristics (FEV₁% predicted, body mass index) and neighborhood rural status. Results: A total of 1800 participants were included in the analysis. Participants residing in the most-disadvantaged neighborhoods had 56% higher rate of COPD exacerbation (P< 0.001), 98% higher rate of severe COPD exacerbation (P=0.001), a 1.6 point higher CAT score (P< 0.001), 3.1 points higher SGRQ (P< 0.001), and 24.6 meters less six-minute walk distance (P=0.008) compared with participants who resided in the least disadvantaged neighborhoods. Conclusion: Participants with COPD who reside in more-disadvantaged neighborhoods had worse COPD outcomes compared to those residing in less-disadvantaged neighborhoods. Neighborhood effects were independent of individual-level socioeconomic factors, suggesting that contextual factors could be used to inform intervention strategies targeting high-risk persons with COPD.

Objectives: To evaluate associations between a readily availvable composite measurement of neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage (the area deprivation index) and 30-day readmissions for patients who were previously hospitalized with sepsis. Design: A retrospective study. Setting: An urban, academic medical institution. Patients: The authors conducted a manual audit for adult patients (18 yr old or older) discharged with an International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition code of sepsis during the 2017 fiscal year to confirm that they met SEP-3 criteria. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: The area deprivation index is a publicly available composite score constructed from socioeconomic components (e.g., income, poverty, education, housing characteristics) based on census block level, where higher scores are associated with more disadvantaged areas (range, 1–100). Using discharge data from the hospital population health database, residential addresses were geocoded and linked to their respective area deprivation index. Patient characteristics, contextual-level variables, and readmissions were compared by t tests for continuous variables and Fisher exact test for categorical variables. The associations between readmissions and area deprivation index were explored using logistic regression models. A total of 647 patients had an International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition diagnosis code of sepsis. Of these 647, 116 (17.9%) either died in hospital or were discharged to hospice and were excluded from our analysis. Of the remaining 531 patients, the mean age was 61.0 years (± 17.6 yr), 281 were females (52.9%), and 164 (30.9%) were active smokers. The mean length of stay was 6.9 days (± 5.6 d) with the mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score 4.9 (± 2.5). The mean area deprivation index was 54.2 (± 23.8). The mean area deprivation index of patients who were readmitted was 62.5 (± 27.4), which was significantly larger than the area deprivation index of patients not readmitted (51.8 [± 22.2]) (p < 0.001). In adjusted logistic regression models, a greater area deprivation index was significantly associated with readmissions (β, 0.03; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Patients who reside in more disadvantaged neighborhoods have a significantly higher risk for 30-day readmission following a hospitalization for sepsis. The insight provided by neighborhood disadvantage scores, such as the area deprivation index, may help to better understand how contextual-level socioeconomic status affects the burden of sepsis-related morbidity.

During the pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2, public health instructions were issued with the hope of curbing the virus’ spread. In an effort to assure accordance with these instructions, equitable strategies for at-risk and vulnerable populations and communities are warranted. One such strategy was our community conference calls, implemented to disseminate information on the pandemic and allow community leaders to discuss struggles and successes. Over the first 6 weeks, we held 12 calls, averaging 125 (standard deviation 41) participants. Participants were primarily from congregations and faith-based organizations that had an established relationship with the hospital, but also included school leaders, elected officials, and representatives of housing associations. Issues discussed included reasons for quarantining, mental health, social isolation, health disparities, and ethical concerns regarding hospital resources. Concerns identified by the community leaders as barriers to effective quarantining and adherence to precautions included food access, housing density, and access to screening and testing. Through the calls, ways to solve such challenges were addressed, with novel strategies and resources reaching the community. This medical–religious resource has proven feasible and valuable during the pandemic and warrants discussions on reproducing it for other communities during this and future infectious disease outbreaks.