Comparison of Hospitalized Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Influenza Patients Requiring Supplemental Oxygen in a Cohort Study: Clinical Impact and Resource Consumption
Abstract:Background
To compare clinical characteristics, outcomes, and resource consumption of patients with COVID-19 and seasonal influenza requiring supplemental oxygen.
Methods
Retrospective cohort study conducted at a tertiary-care hospital. Patients admitted due to seasonal influenza between 2017 and 2019, or with COVID-19 between March and May 2020 requiring supplemental oxygen were compared. Primary outcome: 30-day mortality. S… Show more
“…Despite numerous uncertainties, SARS-CoV-2, specifically the Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant, influenza virus and RSV, may have similarities in terms of symptoms, immune responses, laboratory parameters, the mean viral loads of affected individuals [ 101 , 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 ], the rate of asymptomatic infections and the protective effect of face masks [ 111 , 112 ], although the duration of viral shedding may be longest in SARS-CoV-2 infections [ 78 , 79 , 80 ].…”
Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) on respiratory tract swabs has become the gold standard for sensitive and specific detection of influenza virus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this retrospective analysis, we report on the successive implementation and routine use of multiplex RT-PCR testing for patients admitted to the Internal Medicine Emergency Department (ED) at a tertiary care center in Western Austria, one of the hotspots in the early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Europe. Our description focuses on the use of the Cepheid® Xpert® Xpress closed RT-PCR system in point-of-care testing (POCT). Our indications for RT-PCR testing changed during the observation period: From the cold season 2016/2017 until the cold season 2019/2020, we used RT-PCR to diagnose influenza or RSV infection in patients with fever and/or respiratory symptoms. Starting in March 2020, we used the RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 and a multiplex version for the combined detection of all these three respiratory viruses to also screen subjects who did not present with symptoms of infection but needed in-hospital medical treatment for other reasons. Expectedly, the switch to a more liberal RT-PCR test strategy resulted in a substantial increase in the number of tests. Nevertheless, we observed an immediate decline in influenza virus and RSV detections in early 2020 that coincided with public SARS-CoV-2 containment measures. In contrast, the extensive use of the combined RT-PCR test enabled us to monitor the re-emergence of influenza and RSV detections, including asymptomatic cases, at the end of 2022 when COVID-19 containment measures were no longer in place. Our analysis of PCR results for respiratory viruses from a real-life setting at an ED provides valuable information on the epidemiology of those infections over several years, their contribution to morbidity and need for hospital admission, the risk for nosocomial introduction of such infection into hospitals from asymptomatic carriers, and guidance as to how general precautions and prophylactic strategies affect the dynamics of those infections.
“…Despite numerous uncertainties, SARS-CoV-2, specifically the Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant, influenza virus and RSV, may have similarities in terms of symptoms, immune responses, laboratory parameters, the mean viral loads of affected individuals [ 101 , 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 ], the rate of asymptomatic infections and the protective effect of face masks [ 111 , 112 ], although the duration of viral shedding may be longest in SARS-CoV-2 infections [ 78 , 79 , 80 ].…”
Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) on respiratory tract swabs has become the gold standard for sensitive and specific detection of influenza virus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this retrospective analysis, we report on the successive implementation and routine use of multiplex RT-PCR testing for patients admitted to the Internal Medicine Emergency Department (ED) at a tertiary care center in Western Austria, one of the hotspots in the early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Europe. Our description focuses on the use of the Cepheid® Xpert® Xpress closed RT-PCR system in point-of-care testing (POCT). Our indications for RT-PCR testing changed during the observation period: From the cold season 2016/2017 until the cold season 2019/2020, we used RT-PCR to diagnose influenza or RSV infection in patients with fever and/or respiratory symptoms. Starting in March 2020, we used the RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 and a multiplex version for the combined detection of all these three respiratory viruses to also screen subjects who did not present with symptoms of infection but needed in-hospital medical treatment for other reasons. Expectedly, the switch to a more liberal RT-PCR test strategy resulted in a substantial increase in the number of tests. Nevertheless, we observed an immediate decline in influenza virus and RSV detections in early 2020 that coincided with public SARS-CoV-2 containment measures. In contrast, the extensive use of the combined RT-PCR test enabled us to monitor the re-emergence of influenza and RSV detections, including asymptomatic cases, at the end of 2022 when COVID-19 containment measures were no longer in place. Our analysis of PCR results for respiratory viruses from a real-life setting at an ED provides valuable information on the epidemiology of those infections over several years, their contribution to morbidity and need for hospital admission, the risk for nosocomial introduction of such infection into hospitals from asymptomatic carriers, and guidance as to how general precautions and prophylactic strategies affect the dynamics of those infections.
“…Patients in the pre-omicron group were younger and had fewer comorbidities than those in the remaining groups, consistent with the results of studies conducted during the initial stages of the pandemic. 11 12 13 14 15 16 Conversely, the baseline characteristics were similar between the omicron and influenza groups, with almost half of the patients aged ≥ 70 years and a high prevalence of comorbidities. The age distribution and prevalence of comorbidities varied among patients with the omicron variant and those with previous COVID-19 variants.…”
Section: Dicussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Furthermore, these studies showed conflicting results, with some indicating a higher prevalence of dyspnea in COVID-19 or influenza and other demonstrating no significant differences. 15 25 26 A Korean study found that dyspnea affected 10.6% and 23.4% of patients with pneumonia caused by COVID-19 and influenza, respectively. However, the study only investigated dyspnea of New York Heart Association class 2 or higher.…”
Section: Dicussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, such studies were conducted during the early stages of the pandemic when effective treatment strategies had not yet been developed, which limits the generalizability of the findings. 11 12 13 14 15 16 Therefore, an updated evaluation of this topic is required.…”
Background
The advent of the omicron variant and the formulation of diverse therapeutic strategies marked a new epoch in the realm of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Studies have compared the clinical outcomes between COVID-19 and seasonal influenza, but such studies were conducted during the early stages of the pandemic when effective treatment strategies had not yet been developed, which limits the generalizability of the findings. Therefore, an updated evaluation of the comparative analysis of clinical outcomes between COVID-19 and seasonal influenza is requisite.
Methods
This study used data from the severe acute respiratory infection surveillance system of South Korea. We extracted data for influenza patients who were infected between 2018 and 2019 and COVID-19 patients who were infected in 2021 (pre-omicron period) and 2022 (omicron period). Comparisons of outcomes were conducted among the pre-omicron, omicron, and influenza cohorts utilizing propensity score matching. The adjusted covariates in the propensity score matching included age, sex, smoking, and comorbidities.
Results
The study incorporated 1,227 patients in the pre-omicron cohort, 1,948 patients in the omicron cohort, and 920 patients in the influenza cohort. Following propensity score matching, 491 patients were included in each respective group. Clinical presentations exhibited similarities between the pre-omicron and omicron cohorts; however, COVID-19 patients demonstrated a higher prevalence of dyspnea and pulmonary infiltrates compared to their influenza counterparts. Both COVID-19 groups exhibited higher in-hospital mortality and longer hospital length of stay than the influenza group. The omicron group showed no significant improvement in clinical outcomes compared to the pre-omicron group.
Conclusion
The omicron group did not demonstrate better clinical outcomes than the pre-omicron group, and exhibited significant disease severity compared to the influenza group. Considering the likely persistence of COVID-19 infections, it is imperative to sustain comprehensive studies and ongoing policy support for the virus to enhance the prognosis for individuals affected by COVID-19.
“…18 Almost, all public health restrictions have now been lifted and this could increase the likelihood of more respiratory virus co-infections during future winters, substantially straining the available healthcare resources. 19 , 20 Interestingly, it is reported that influenza vaccination may be associated with a reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. 21 These results lend support to the importance of continuing vaccinating against Covid-19 as well as against Influenza.…”
A recent study reported that the high-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine provided superior immunogenicity and efficacy versus the standard-dose quadrivalent vaccine in the elderly. However, we need to view these results in terms of public health benefits as well. The Number Needed to Vaccinate (NNV) is an important tool to measure the benefit of a given vaccine. Further, NNV evaluates the benefits of a vaccine in preventing and controlling communicable diseases. Considering the target of vaccination and coverage of 75% not met in the elderly in Europe, it is important not to prioritize one vaccine over the other, but rather to increase the vaccine coverage with all the available vaccines.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.