Summary Objectives Vitamin D deficiency (VDD) has been proposed to play a role in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pathophysiology. We aim to evaluate our implementation of a local protocol for treatment of VDD among patients hospitalized for COVID‐19; to assess the prevalence of VDD among COVID‐19 inpatients, and examine potential associations with disease severity and fatality. Design and Participants We conducted a retrospective interim audit of a local clinical care pathway for 134 inpatients with COVID‐19. Prevalence of VDD, compliance with local treatment protocol and relationship of baseline serum 25(OH)D with markers of COVID‐19 severity and fatality were analysed. Results 55.8% of eligible patients received Colecalciferol replacement, albeit not all according to the suggested protocol. Patients admitted to ITU were younger than those managed on medical wards (61.1 years ± 11.8 vs. 76.4 years ± 14.9, respectively, p<0.001), with greater prevalence of hypertension, higher baseline respiratory rate, National Early Warning Score‐2 and C‐Reactive protein level. While mean serum 25(OH)D levels were comparable (p=0.3), only 19% of ITU patients had 25(OH)D levels greater than 50 nmol/L vs. 39.1% of non‐ITU patients (p=0.02). However, there was no association with fatality, potentially due to small sample size and prompt diagnosis and treatment of VDD. Conclusions Higher prevalence of VDD was observed in patients requiring ITU admission compared to patients managed on medical wards. Larger prospective studies and/or clinical trials are needed to validate and extend our observations.

Objectives: To audit implementation of a local protocol for the treatment of vitamin D deficiency (VDD) among patients hospitalized for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), including an assessment of the prevalence of VDD in these patients, and of potential associations with disease severity and fatality. Design: This was not a study or clinical trial, but rather a retrospective interim audit (Newcastle-upon-Tyne Hospitals Registration No. 10075) of a local clinical care pathway for hospitalized patients with COVID-19-related illness. The Information (Caldicott) Guardian permitted these data to be shared beyond the confines of our institution. Setting: A large tertiary academic NHS Foundation Trust in the North East of England, UK, providing care to COVID-19 patients. Participants: One hundred thirty-four hospitalized patients with documented COVID-19 infection. Main outcome measures: Adherence to local investigation and treatment protocol; prevalence of VDD, and relationship of baseline serum 25(OH)D with markers of COVID-19 severity and inpatient fatality versus recovery. Results: 55.8% of eligible patients received Colecalciferol replacement, albeit not always loaded as rapidly as our protocol suggested, and no cases of new hypercalcaemia occurred following treatment. Patients admitted to ITU were younger than those managed on medical wards (61.1 years +/- 11.8 vs. 76.4 years +/- 14.9, p<0.001), with greater prevalence of hypertension, and higher baseline respiratory rate, National Early Warning Score-2 and C-reactive protein level. While mean serum 25(OH)D levels were comparable [i.e. ITU: 33.5 nmol/L +/- 16.8 vs. Non-ITU: 48.1 nmol/L +/- 38.2, mean difference for Ln-transformed-25(OH)D: 0.14, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) (-0.15, 0.41), p=0.3], only 19% of ITU patients had 25(OH)D levels greater than 50 nmol/L vs. 39.1% of non-ITU patients (p=0.02). However, we found no association with fatality, potentially due to small sample size, limitations of no-trial data and, potentially, the prompt diagnosis and treatment of VDD. Conclusions: Subject to the inherent limitations of observational (non-trial) audit data, analysed retrospectively, we found that patients requiring ITU admission were more frequently vitamin D deficient than those managed on medical wards, despite being significantly younger. Larger prospective studies and/or clinical trials are needed to elucidate the role of vitamin D as a preventive and/or therapeutic strategy for mitigating the effects of COVID-19 infection in patients with VDD.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract