Objectives The majority of available scores to assess mortality risk of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) patients in the emergency department have high risk of bias. Therefore, our aim was to develop and validate a score at hospital admission for predicting in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients, and to compare this score with other existing ones. Methods Consecutive patients (≥18 years) with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to the participating hospitals were included. Logistic regression analysis was performed to develop a prediction model for in-hospital mortality, based on the 3978 patients admitted between March-July, 2020. The model was validated in the 1054 patients admitted during August-September, as well as in an external cohort of 474 Spanish patients. Results Median (25th-75th percentile) age of the model-derivation cohort was 60 (48-72) years, and in-hospital mortality was 20.3%. The validation cohorts had similar age distribution and in-hospital mortality. Seven significant variables were included in the risk score: age, blood urea nitrogen, number of comorbidities, C-reactive protein, SpO 2 /FiO 2 ratio, platelet count and heart rate. The model had high discriminatory value (AUROC 0.844, 95% CI 0.829 to 0.859), which was confirmed in the Brazilian (0.859 [95% CI 0.833 to 0.885]) and Spanish (0.894 [95% CI 0.870 to 0.919]) validation cohorts, and displayed better discrimination ability than other existing scores. It is implemented in a freely available online risk calculator (https://abc2sph.com/). Conclusions We designed and validated an easy-to-use rapid scoring system based on characteristics of COVID-19 patients commonly available at hospital presentation, for early stratification for in-hospital mortality risk of patients with COVID-19.

Objective: To develop and validate a rapid scoring system at hospital admission for predicting in-hospital mortality in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), and to compare this score with other existing ones. Design: Cohort study Setting: The Brazilian COVID-19 Registry has been conducted in 36 Brazilian hospitals in 17 cities. Logistic regression analysis was performed to develop a prediction model for in-hospital mortality, based on the 3978 patients that were admitted between March-July, 2020. The model was then validated in the 1054 patients admitted during August-September, as well as in an external cohort of 474 Spanish patients. Participants: Consecutive symptomatic patients (≥18 years old) with laboratory confirmed COVID-19 admitted to participating hospitals. Patients who were transferred between hospitals and in whom admission data from the first hospital or the last hospital were not available were excluded, as well those who were admitted for other reasons and developed COVID-19 symptoms during their stay. Main outcome measures: In-hospital mortality Results: Median (25th-75th percentile) age of the model-derivation cohort was 60 (48-72) years, 53.8% were men, in-hospital mortality was 20.3%. The validation cohorts had similar age distribution and in-hospital mortality. From 20 potential predictors, seven significant variables were included in the in-hospital mortality risk score: age, blood urea nitrogen, number of comorbidities, C-reactive protein, SpO2/FiO2 ratio, platelet count and heart rate. The model had high discriminatory value (AUROC 0.844, 95% CI 0.829 to 0.859), which was confirmed in the Brazilian (0.859) and Spanish (0.899) validation cohorts. Our ABC2-SPH score showed good calibration in both Brazilian cohorts, but, in the Spanish cohort, mortality was somewhat underestimated in patients with very high (>25%) risk. The ABC2-SPH score is implemented in a freely available online risk calculator (https://abc2sph.com/). Conclusions: We designed and validated an easy-to-use rapid scoring system based on characteristics of COVID-19 patients commonly available at hospital presentation, for early stratification for in-hospital mortality risk of patients with COVID-19.

No abstract

Background: The economic impact associated with the treatment strategies of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) patients by hospitals and health-care systems in Brazil is unknown and difficult to estimate. This research describes the investments made to absorb the demand for treatment and the changes in occupation rates and billing in Brazilian hospitals. Methods: This research covers the initial findings of “COVID-19 hospital costs and the proposition of a bundled reimbursement strategy for the health-care system,” which includes 10 hospitals. The chief financial officer, the chief medical officer, and hospital executives of each participating hospital provided information regarding investments attributed to COVID-19 patient treatment. The analysis included variations in occupation rates and billing from 2019 to 2020 observed in each institution, and the investments for medical equipment, individual protection materials and building construction per patient treated. Results: The majority of hospitals registered a decrease in hospitalization rates and revenue from 2019 to 2020. For intensive care units (ICUs), the mean occupancy rate ranged from 88% to 83%, and for wards, it ranged from 85% to 73%. Monthly average revenue decreased by 10%. The mean hospital investment per COVID-19 inpatient was I$6800 (standard deviation 7664), with the purchase of ventilators as the most common investment. For this item, the mean, highest and lowest acquisition cost per ventilator were, respectively, I$31 468, I$48 881 and I$17 777. Conclusion: There was significant variability in acquisition costs and investments by institution for responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings highlight the importance of continuing microeconomic studies for a comprehensive assessment of hospital costs. Only with more detailed analyses, will it be possible to define and drive sustainable strategies to manage and reimburse COVID-19 treatment in health-care systems.

This case report describes the previously-unreported clinical course of a patient with a so-called incomplete systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), i.e. symptoms related to one organ system only, together with the presence of ANA. He had an indolent course initially and developed, 6 months after the first symptoms, a severe disease with rapid appearance of major and unusual manifestations. The possibility of fast progression and a grave course of an incomplete SLE should be kept in mind. This report is meant to heighten awareness of such an atypical presentation so that prompt and aggressive immunosuppressive therapy may be instituted.

Previous studies that assessed risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in COVID-19 patients have shown inconsistent results. Our aim was to investigate VTE predictors by both logistic regression (LR) and machine learning (ML) approaches, due to their potential complementarity. This cohort study of a large Brazilian COVID-19 Registry included 4120 COVID-19 adult patients from 16 hospitals. Symptomatic VTE was confirmed by objective imaging. LR analysis, tree-based boosting, and bagging were used to investigate the association of variables upon hospital presentation with VTE. Among 4,120 patients (55.5% men, 39.3% critical patients), VTE was confirmed in 6.7%. In multivariate LR analysis, obesity (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.11–2.02); being an ex-smoker (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.03–2.01); surgery ≤ 90 days (OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.14–4.23); axillary temperature (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.22–1.63); D-dimer ≥ 4 times above the upper limit of reference value (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.26–3.67), lactate (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.02–1.19), C-reactive protein levels (CRP, OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.01–1.18); and neutrophil count (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.005–1.075) were independent predictors of VTE. Atrial fibrillation, peripheral oxygen saturation/inspired oxygen fraction (SF) ratio and prophylactic use of anticoagulants were protective. Temperature at admission, SF ratio, neutrophil count, D-dimer, CRP and lactate levels were also identified as predictors by ML methods. By using ML and LR analyses, we showed that D-dimer, axillary temperature, neutrophil count, CRP and lactate levels are risk factors for VTE in COVID-19 patients. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11739-022-03002-z.

ObjectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in widespread morbidity and mortality with the consequences expected to be felt for many years. Significant variation exists in the care even of similar patients with COVID-19, including treatment practices within and between institutions. Outcome measures vary among clinical trials on the same therapies. Understanding which therapies are of most value is not possible unless consensus can be reached on which outcomes are most important to measure. Furthermore, consensus on the most important outcomes may enable patients to monitor and track their care, and may help providers to improve the care they offer through quality improvement. To develop a standardised minimum set of outcomes for clinical care, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) assembled a working group (WG) of 28 volunteers, including health professionals, patients and patient representatives.DesignA list of outcomes important to patients and professionals was generated from a systematic review of the published literature using the MEDLINE database, from review of outcomes being measured in ongoing clinical trials, from a survey distributed to patients and patient networks, and from previously published ICHOM standard sets in other disease areas. Using an online-modified Delphi process, the WG selected outcomes of greatest importance.ResultsThe outcomes considered by the WG to be most important were selected and categorised into five domains: (1) functional status and quality of life, (2) mental functioning, (3) social functioning, (4) clinical outcomes and (5) symptoms. The WG identified demographic and clinical variables for use as case-mix risk adjusters. These included baseline demographics, clinical factors and treatment-related factors.ConclusionImplementation of these consensus recommendations could help institutions to monitor, compare and improve the quality and delivery of care to patients with COVID-19. Their consistent definition and collection could also broaden the implementation of more patient-centric clinical outcomes research.

Background It is not clear whether previous thyroid diseases influence the course and outcomes of COVID-19. Methods The study is a part of a multicentric cohort of patients with confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis from 37 hospitals. Matching for age, sex, number of comorbidities and hospital was performed for the paired analysis. Results From 7,762 COVID-19 patients, 526 had previously diagnosed hypothyroidism and 526 were matched controls. The median age was 70 years-old and 68.3% were females. The prevalence of comorbidities was similar, except for coronary and chronic kidney diseases that were higher in the hypothyroidism group (p=0.015 and p=0.001). D-dimer levels were lower in hypothyroid patients (p=0.037). In-hospital management was similar, but hospital length-of-stay (p=0.029) and mechanical ventilation requirement (p=0.006) were lower for patients with hypothyroidism. There was a trend of lower in-hospital mortality in patients with hypothyroidism (22.1% vs. 27.0%; p=0.062). Conclusion Patients with hypothyroidism had a lower requirement of mechanical ventilation, and showed a trend of lower in-hospital mortality. Therefore, hypothyroidism does not seem to be associated with a worse prognosis.