No abstract

As the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic spread to the US, so too did descriptions of an associated coagulopathy and thrombotic complications. Hospitals created institutional protocols for inpatient management of COVID-19 coagulopathy and thrombosis in response to this developing data. We collected and analyzed protocols from 21 US academic medical centers developed between January and May 2020. We found greatest consensus on recommendations for heparin-based pharmacologic venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in COVID-19 patients without contraindications. Protocols differed regarding incorporation of D-dimer tests, dosing of VTE prophylaxis, indications for post-discharge pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis, how to evaluate for VTE, and the use of empiric therapeutic anticoagulation. These findings support ongoing efforts to establish international, evidence-based guidelines.

No abstract

Anticoagulant medications are frequently used to prevent and treat thromboembolic disease. However, the benefits of anticoagulants must be balanced with a careful assessment of the risk of bleeding complications that can ensue from their use. Several bleeding risk scores are available, including the Outpatient Bleeding Risk Index, HAS-BLED, ATRIA, and HEMORRHAGES risk assessment tools, and can be used to help estimate patients' risk for bleeding on anticoagulants. These tools vary by their individual risk components and in how they define and weigh clinical factors. However, it is not yet clear how best to integrate bleeding risk tools into clinical practice. Current bleeding risk scores generally have modest predictive ability and limited ability to predict the most devastating complication of anticoagulation, intracranial hemorrhage. In clinical practice, bleeding risk tools should be paired with a formal determination of thrombosis risk, as their results may be most influential for patients at the lower end of thrombosis risk, as well as for highlighting potentially modifiable risk factors for bleeding. Use of bleeding risk scores may assist clinicians and patients in making informed and individualized anticoagulation decisions.

No abstract

ImportancePatients hospitalized with COVID-19 have higher rates of venous thromboembolism (VTE), but the risk and predictors of VTE among individuals with less severe COVID-19 managed in outpatient settings are less well understood.ObjectivesTo assess the risk of VTE among outpatients with COVID-19 and identify independent predictors of VTE.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsA retrospective cohort study was conducted at 2 integrated health care delivery systems in Northern and Southern California. Data for this study were obtained from the Kaiser Permanente Virtual Data Warehouse and electronic health records. Participants included nonhospitalized adults aged 18 years or older with COVID-19 diagnosed between January 1, 2020, and January 31, 2021, with follow-up through February 28, 2021.ExposuresPatient demographic and clinical characteristics identified from integrated electronic health records.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was the rate per 100 person-years of diagnosed VTE, which was identified using an algorithm based on encounter diagnosis codes and natural language processing. Multivariable regression using a Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard model was used to identify variables independently associated with VTE risk. Multiple imputation was used to address missing data.ResultsA total of 398 530 outpatients with COVID-19 were identified. The mean (SD) age was 43.8 (15.8) years, 53.7% were women, and 54.3% were of self-reported Hispanic ethnicity. There were 292 (0.1%) VTE events identified over the follow-up period, for an overall rate of 0.26 (95% CI, 0.24-0.30) per 100 person-years. The sharpest increase in VTE risk was observed during the first 30 days after COVID-19 diagnosis (unadjusted rate, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.51-0.67 per 100 person-years vs 0.09; 95% CI, 0.08-0.11 per 100 person-years after 30 days). In multivariable models, the following variables were associated with a higher risk for VTE in the setting of nonhospitalized COVID-19: age 55 to 64 years (HR 1.85 [95% CI, 1.26-2.72]), 65 to 74 years (3.43 [95% CI, 2.18-5.39]), 75 to 84 years (5.46 [95% CI, 3.20-9.34]), greater than or equal to 85 years (6.51 [95% CI, 3.05-13.86]), male gender (1.49 [95% CI, 1.15-1.96]), prior VTE (7.49 [95% CI, 4.29-13.07]), thrombophilia (2.52 [95% CI, 1.04-6.14]), inflammatory bowel disease (2.43 [95% CI, 1.02-5.80]), body mass index 30.0-39.9 (1.57 [95% CI, 1.06-2.34]), and body mass index greater than or equal to 40.0 (3.07 [1.95-4.83]).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study of outpatients with COVID-19, the absolute risk of VTE was low. Several patient-level factors were associated with higher VTE risk; these findings may help identify subsets of patients with COVID-19 who may benefit from more intensive surveillance or VTE preventive strategies.

If you are aware of the disparities between genders in academic medicine, recent publications show multiple areas with opportunities for improvement. Jena and colleagues 1 found that female physicians in academia were less likely than their male counterparts to have reached the rank of full professor (11.9% vs 28.6%). Serge et al 2 reported that start-up funding packages-which help launch faculty careerswere 67.5% higher for men than for women ($980 000 vs $585 000). Finally, Jena and colleagues 3 reported that salaries for female academic physicians are $19 879, or 8.0%, lower than those of their male colleagues.Among the myriad rationalizations for these disparities between the genders in academic medicine, some have suggested that the burden of home responsibilities, leave for childbearing, or part-time schedules might undermine the quality of female physicians' work and explain male physicians' higher salaries. In this issue of JAMA Internal Medicine, Tsugawa et al 4 find that the evidence shows the opposite for all internists, not just those in academia, as detailed above.The group examined data from hospitalized Medicare patients and found that patients treated by female internists fared better than patients treated by male internists, with lower 30day readmissions (15.02% vs 15.57%) and lower 30-day mortality (11.07% vs 11.49%). 4 The differences persisted across 8

No abstract