ObjectiveTo describe outcomes of people admitted to hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) in the United States, and the clinical and laboratory characteristics associated with severity of illness.DesignProspective cohort study.SettingSingle academic medical center in New York City and Long Island.Participants5279 patients with laboratory confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov-2) infection between 1 March 2020 and 8 April 2020. The final date of follow up was 5 May 2020.Main outcome measuresOutcomes were admission to hospital, critical illness (intensive care, mechanical ventilation, discharge to hospice care, or death), and discharge to hospice care or death. Predictors included patient characteristics, medical history, vital signs, and laboratory results. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to identify risk factors for adverse outcomes, and competing risk survival analysis for mortality.ResultsOf 11 544 people tested for SARS-Cov-2, 5566 (48.2%) were positive. After exclusions, 5279 were included. 2741 of these 5279 (51.9%) were admitted to hospital, of whom 1904 (69.5%) were discharged alive without hospice care and 665 (24.3%) were discharged to hospice care or died. Of 647 (23.6%) patients requiring mechanical ventilation, 391 (60.4%) died and 170 (26.2%) were extubated or discharged. The strongest risk for hospital admission was associated with age, with an odds ratio of >2 for all age groups older than 44 years and 37.9 (95% confidence interval 26.1 to 56.0) for ages 75 years and older. Other risks were heart failure (4.4, 2.6 to 8.0), male sex (2.8, 2.4 to 3.2), chronic kidney disease (2.6, 1.9 to 3.6), and any increase in body mass index (BMI) (eg, for BMI >40: 2.5, 1.8 to 3.4). The strongest risks for critical illness besides age were associated with heart failure (1.9, 1.4 to 2.5), BMI >40 (1.5, 1.0 to 2.2), and male sex (1.5, 1.3 to 1.8). Admission oxygen saturation of <88% (3.7, 2.8 to 4.8), troponin level >1 (4.8, 2.1 to 10.9), C reactive protein level >200 (5.1, 2.8 to 9.2), and D-dimer level >2500 (3.9, 2.6 to 6.0) were, however, more strongly associated with critical illness than age or comorbidities. Risk of critical illness decreased significantly over the study period. Similar associations were found for mortality alone.ConclusionsAge and comorbidities were found to be strong predictors of hospital admission and to a lesser extent of critical illness and mortality in people with covid-19; however, impairment of oxygen on admission and markers of inflammation were most strongly associated with critical illness and mortality. Outcomes seem to be improving over time, potentially suggesting improvements in care.

Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at increased risk of thrombosis. 1 However, studies have been limited in size, did not report all thrombotic events, and focused on patients with severe disease hospitalized in intensive care units (ICUs). We assessed the incidence of, and risk factors for, venous and arterial thrombotic events in all hospitalized patients with COVID-19 at a large health system consisting of 4 hospitals in New York City. Methods | This study included consecutive patients aged at least 18 years, admitted to a hospital affiliated with NYU Langone Health between March 1 and April 17, 2020, who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) using reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reac

Background:Little is known about factors associated with hospitalization and critical illness in Covid-19 positive patients. Methods:We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of all patients with laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 treated at an academic health system in New York City between March 1, 2020 and April 2, 2020, with follow up through April 7, 2020. Primary outcomes were hospitalization and critical illness (intensive care, mechanical ventilation, hospice and/or death). We conducted multivariable logistic regression to identify risk factors for adverse outcomes, and maximum information gain decision tree classifications to identify key splitters. Results: Among 4,103 Covid-19 patients, 1,999 (48.7%) were hospitalized, of whom 981/1,999 (49.1%) have been discharged, and 292/1,999 (14.6%) have died or been discharged to hospice. Of 445 patients requiring mechanical ventilation, 162/445 (36.4%) have died. Strongest hospitalization risks were age ≥ 75 years (OR 66.8, 95% CI, 44.7-102.6), age 65-74 (OR 10.9, 95% CI, 8.35-14.34), BMI>40 (OR 6.2, 95% CI, 4.2-9.3), and heart failure (OR 4.3 95% CI, 1.9-11.2). Strongest critical illness risks were admission oxygen saturation <88% (OR 6.99, 95% CI 4.5-11.0), d-dimer>2500 (OR 6.9, 95% CI, 3.2-15.2), ferritin >2500 (OR 6.9, 95% CI, 3.2-15.2), and C-reactive protein (CRP) >200 (OR 5.78, 95% CI,). In the decision tree for admission, the most important features were age >65 and obesity; for critical illness, the most important was SpO2<88, followed by procalcitonin >0.5, troponin <0.1 (protective), age >64 and CRP>200.Conclusions: Age and comorbidities are powerful predictors of hospitalization; however, admission oxygen impairment and markers of inflammation are most strongly associated with critical illness.

The European Union, the UK National Institute for Health Research, the Wellcome Trust, the UK Medical Research Council, Action on Hearing Loss, the UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, the Oak Foundation, the Economic and Social Research Council, Helmholtz Zentrum Munchen, the German Research Center for Environmental Health, the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, the German Center for Diabetes Research, the Munich Center for Health Sciences, the Ministry of Science and Research of the State of North Rhine-Westphalia, and the German Federal Ministry of Health.

Recent substantive reforms to the English National Health Service expanded patient choice and encouraged hospitals to compete within a market with fixed prices. This study investigates whether these reforms led to improvements in hospital quality. We use a difference-in-difference-style estimator to test whether hospital quality (measured using mortality from acute myocardial infarction) improved more quickly in more competitive markets after these reforms came into force in 2006. We find that after the reforms were implemented, mortality fell (i.e. quality improved) for patients living in more competitive markets. Our results suggest that hospital competition can lead to improvements in hospital quality.