ObjectiveTo investigate possible relationships between pre-existing medical conditions (including common comorbidities and chronic medications) and risk for suffering COVID-19 disease in middle-aged and older adults.DesignPopulation-based retrospective cohort study.SettingTwelve primary care centres (PCCs) in Tarragona (Spain).Participants79 083 people (77 676 community-dwelling and 1407 nursing-home residents), who were all individuals aged >50 years affiliated to the 12 participating PCCs.OutcomesBaseline cohort characteristics (age, sex, vaccinations, comorbidities and chronic medications) were established at study start (1st. March 2020) and primary outcome was time to COVID-19 confirmed by PCR among cohort members throughout the epidemic period (from 1st. March 2020 to 23rd. May 2020). Risk for suffering COVID-19 was evaluated by Cox regression, estimating multivariable HRs adjusted for age, sex, comorbidities and medications use.ResultsDuring the study period, 2324 cohort members were PCR-tested, with 1944 negative and 380 positive results, which means an incidence of 480.5 PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases per 100 000 persons-period. Assessing the total study cohort, only age (HR 1.02; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.03; p=0.002), nursing-home residence (HR 21.83; 95% CI 16.66 to 28.61; p<0.001) and receiving diuretics (HR 1.35; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.76; p=0.026) appeared independently associated with increased risk. Smoking (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.41 to 0.93; p=0.022), ACE inhibitors (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.99; p=0.046) and antihistamine (HR 0.47; 95% CI 0.22 to 1.01; p=0.052) were associated with a lower risk. Among community-dwelling individuals, cancer (HR 1.52; 95% CI 1.03 to 2.24; p=0.035), chronic respiratory disease (HR 1.82; 95% CI 1.08 to 3.07; p=0.025) and cardiac disease (HR 1.53; 95% CI 1.06 to 2.19; p=0.021) emerged to be also associated with an increased risk. Receiving ACE inhibitors (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.44 to 0.99; p=0.046) and influenza vaccination (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.44 to 0.91; p=0.012) was associated with decreased risk.ConclusionAge, nursing-home residence and multiple comorbidities appear predisposing for COVID-19. Conversely, receiving ACE inhibitors, antihistamine and influenza vaccination could be protective, which should be closely investigated in further studies specifically focused on these concerns.

The use of some anti‐hypertensive drugs in the current COVID‐19 pandemic has become controversial. This study investigated possible relationships between anti‐hypertensive medications use and COVID‐19 infection risk in the ambulatory hypertensive population. This is a population‐based retrospective cohort study involving 34 936 hypertensive adults >50 years in Tarragona (Southern Catalonia, Spain) who were retrospectively followed through pandemic period (from 01/03/2020 to 30/04/2020). Two data sets including demographic/clinical characteristics (comorbidities and cardiovascular medications use) and laboratory PCR codes for COVID‐19 were linked to construct an anonymized research database. Cox regression was used to calculate multivariable hazard ratios (HRs) and estimate the risk of suffering COVID‐19 infection. Across study period, 205 PCR‐confirmed COVID‐19 cases were observed, which means an overall incidence of 586.8 cases per 100 000 persons‐period. In multivariable analyses, only age (HR: 1.03; 95% CI: 1.02‐1.05; P < .001) and nursing home residence (HR: 19.60; 95% CI: 13.80‐27.84; P < .001) appeared significantly associated with increased risk of COVID‐19. Considering anti‐hypertensive drugs, receiving diuretics (HR: 1.22; 95% CI: 0.90‐1.67; P = .205), calcium channel blockers (HR: 1.29; 95%CI: 0.91‐1.82; P = .148), beta‐blockers (HR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.68‐1.37; P = .844), and angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors (HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.61‐1.13; P = .238) did not significantly alter the risk of PCR‐confirmed COVID‐19, whereas receiving angiotensin II receptor blockers was associated with an almost statistically significant reduction risk (HR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.44‐1.01; P = .054). In conclusion, our data support that receiving renin‐angiotensin‐aldosterone system inhibitors does not predispose for suffering COVID‐19 infection in ambulatory hypertensive people. Conversely, receiving angiotensin II receptor blockers could be related with a reduced risk.

No abstract

OBJETIVO: Investigar posibles factores pronósticos y escalas predictivas simples en adultos mayores con COVID-19. DISEÑO: Cohorte retrospectiva de base comunitaria. EMPLAZAMIENTO: Atención Primaria Tarragona. PARTICIPANTES: 282 adultos ≥50 años no institucionalizados con COVID-19 confirmada (hospitalizada o ambulatoria) ocurrida durante marzo-junio 2020. MEDICIONES PRINCIPALES: la relación entre covariables basales (edad, sexo, condiciones/comorbilidades preexistentes y sintomatología inicial) y el riesgo de mala evolución (ingreso en UCI o muerte) se analizó mediante modelos de regresión logística. RESULTADOS: De los 282 COVID-19 casos (edad media 65.9 años; 49.6% varones), 154 (54.6%) fueron hospitalizados (30 ingresados en UCI) y 45 (16%) fallecieron. En total, 64 (22.7%) requirieron UCI o fallecieron. La mediana de tiempo de seguimiento durante el curso clínico fue 31 días (rango: 30-150) en los pacientes que sobrevivieron y 14 días (rango: 1-81) en fallecidos. En análisis crudos, la edad/años, sexo varón, algunas comorbilidades (enfermedad renal, respiratoria o cardiaca, diabetes e hipertensión) y síntomas (confusión/letargia, disnea) se asociaron con mayor riesgo de UCI/muerte, mientras que otros síntomas (rinorrea, mialgias, cefalea, ageusia/anosmia) se asociaron con menor riesgo. En análisis multivariable solo la edad/años (OR: 1.04; IC 95%: 1.01-1.07; p=0.004), confusión/letargia (OR: 5.33; IC 95%: 1.54-18.48; p=0.008), disnea (OR: 5.41; IC 95%: 2.74-10.69; p<0.001) y mialgias (OR: 0.30; IC 95%: 0.10-0.93; p=0.038) permanecieron significativamente asociadas con mayor/menor riesgo. Una posible escala pronóstica CD65-M (acrónimo de las 4 variables mencionadas) mostró buena correlación con el riesgo de UCI/muerte (área bajo curva ROC: 0.828; IC 95%: 0.774-0.882). CONCLUSIÓN: La evolución clínica en pacientes COVID-19 es inicialmente impredecible, pero la aplicación de escalas pronósticas simples como la propuesta CD65-M (pendiente validación externa) podría ser útil para una orientación/valoración pronóstica de estos pacientes en atención primaria.

Background Direct and indirect COVID19-related mortality is uncertain. This study investigated all-cause and COVID19-related deaths among middle-aged and older adults during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic period, assessing mortality risks by pre-existing socio-demographic and medical underlying conditions. Methods Population-based cohort study involving 79,083 individuals ≥50 years-old in Tarragona (Southern Catalonia, Spain). Baseline cohort characteristics (age/sex, comorbidities and medications/vaccinations history) were established at study start (01/03/2020) and main outcomes were COVID19-related deaths (those occurred among patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID19) and all-cause deaths occurred among cohort members between 01/03/2020–30/06/2020. Mortality risks were assessed by Cox regression analyses. Results Cohort members were followed for 1,356,358 persons-weeks, occurring 576 all-cause deaths (124 COVID19-related deaths). Of the 124 deceased patients with a laboratory-confirmed COVID19, 112 (90.3%) died by (due to) COVID-19, while 12 (9.7%) died with COVID-19 (but likely due to other concomitant causes). All-cause mortality rate among cohort members across study period was 42.5 deaths per 100,000 persons-week, being 22.8 among healthy/unrelated-COVID19 subjects, 236.4 in COVID19-excluded/PCR-negative subjects, 493.7 in COVID19-compatible/PCR-unperformed subjects and 4009.1 in COVID19-confirmed patients. Increasing age, sex male, nursing-home residence, cancer, neurologic, cardiac or liver disease, receiving diuretics, systemic corticosteroids, proton-pump inhibitors and benzodiazepines were associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality; conversely, receiving renin-angiotensin inhibitors and statins were associated with reduced risk. Age/years (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06–1.10), sex male (HR: 1.82; 95% CI: 1.24–2.70), nursing-home residence (HR: 12.56; 95% CI: 8.07–19.54) and number of pre-existing comorbidities (HR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.01–1.29) were significant predictors for COVID19-related mortality, but none specific comorbidity emerged significantly associated with an increased risk in multivariable analysis evaluating it. Conclusion COVID19-related deaths represented more than 20 % of all-cause mortality occurred among middle-aged and older adults during the first wave of the pandemic in the region. A considerable proportion (around 10 %) of these COVID19-related deaths could be attributed to other concomitant causes. Theoretically COVID19-excluded subjects (PCR-negative) suffered ten-times greater all-cause mortality than healthy/unrelated-COVID19 subjects, which points to the existence of considerable number of false negative results in earlier PCR testing and could explain part of the global excess all-cause mortality observed during the pandemic.

Objectives: (1) To describe the epidemiology of patient safety (PS) incidents registered in an electronic notification system in primary care (PC) health centres; (2) to define a risk map; and (3) to identify the critical areas where intervention is needed. Design: Descriptive analytical study of incidents reported from 1 January to 31 December 2018, on the TPSC Cloud™ platform (The Patient Safety Company) accessible from the corporate website (Intranet) of the regional public health service. Setting: 24 Catalan Institute of Health PC health centres of the Tarragona region (Spain). Participants: Professionals from the PC health centres and a Patient Safety Functional Unit. Measurements: Data obtained from records voluntarily submitted to an electronic, standardised and anonymised form. Data recorded: healthcare unit, notifier, type of incident, risk matrix, causal and contributing factors, preventability, level of resolution and improvement actions. Results: A total of 1544 reports were reviewed and 1129 PS incidents were analysed: 25.0% of incidents did not reach the patient; 66.5% reached the patient without causing harm, and 8.5% caused adverse events. Nurses provided half of the reports (48.5%), while doctors reported more adverse events (70.8%; p < 0.01). Of the 96 adverse events, 46.9% only required observation, 34.4% caused temporary damage that required treatment, 13.5% required (or prolonged) hospitalization, and 5.2% caused severe permanent damage and/or a situation close to death. Notably, 99.2% were considered preventable. The main critical areas were: communication (27.8%), clinical-administrative management (25.1%), care delivery (23.5%) and medicines (18.4%); few incidents were related to diagnosis (3.6%). Conclusions: PS incident notification applications are adequate for reporting incidents and adverse events associated with healthcare. Approximately 75% and 10% of incidents reach the patient and cause some damage, respectively, and most cases are considered preventable. Adequate and strengthened risk management of critical areas is required to improve PS.

No abstract

No abstract