Comparison of Outcomes of In-Centre Haemodialysis Patients between the 1st and 2nd COVID-19 Outbreak in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland: A UK Renal Registry Analysis

Savino, Manuela; Santhakumaran, Shalini; Currie, Christine S. M.; Onggo, Bhakti Stephan; Evans, Katharine; Mu, James; Nitsch, Dorothea; Steenkamp, Retha

doi:10.1159/000523731

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 17 publications

(16 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Data on testing frequency were not available. It is likely that there was higher testing frequency in the ICHD population [ 14 ], so cases were more likely to be detected than for other modalities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What data collection methods work best for COVID19 outbreak surveillance for people with end stage kidney disease? An observational cohort study using the UK Renal Registry

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Patients on kidney replacement therapy (KRT) are vulnerable to severe illness from COVID-19. Timely, accurate surveillance is essential for planning and implementing infection control at local, regional and national levels. Our aim was to compare two methods of data collection for COVID-19 infections amongst KRT patients in England. Methods Adults receiving KRT in England were linked to two sources of data on positive COVID-19 tests recorded March-August 2020: (1) submissions from renal centres to the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) and (2) Public Health England (PHE) laboratory data. Patient characteristics, cumulative incidence by modality (in-centre haemodialysis (ICHD), home HD, peritoneal dialysis (PD) and transplant), and 28-day survival were compared between the two sources. Results 2,783/54,795 patients (5.1%) had a positive test in the combined UKRR-PHE dataset. Of these 2,783, 87% had positive tests in both datasets. Capture was consistently high for PHE (> 95% across modalities) but varied for UKRR (ranging from ICHD 95% to transplant 78%, p < 0.0001). Patients captured only by PHE were more likely to be on transplant or home therapies (OR 3.5 95% CI [2.3–5.2] vs. ICHD) and to be infected in later months (OR 3.3 95%CI [2.4–4.6] for May-June, OR 6.5 95%CI [3.8–11.3] for July-August, vs. March-April), compared to patients in both datasets. Stratified by modality, patient characteristics and 28-day survival were similar between datasets. Conclusions For patients undergoing ICHD treatment the collection of data submitted directly by renal centres allows constant monitoring in real time. For other KRT modalities, using a national swab test dataset through frequent linkage may be the most effective method. Optimising central surveillance can improve patient care by informing interventions and assisting planning at local, regional and national levels.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What data collection methods work best for COVID19 outbreak surveillance for people with end stage kidney disease? An observational cohort study using the UK Renal Registry

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…But, correct use of personal protective equipment and personnel caring is very important to prevent the infection [9]. One more study compared the 1 st wave and 2 nd wave data on haemodialysis patients saying that risk of death of dialysis patients remains unchanged between the first and second outbreaks and suggested that vulnerable patient group needs to be prioritized for interventions to prevent severe COVID-19 includes vaccination [10]. Previous studies revealed that the infection rate is high in old age subjects, but we found that the age is not significantly associated with positive rate.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Qualitative prevalence assessment of SARS-CoV2 infection by comparing first, second and third wave data: A sentinel surveillance testing centre study

Nagarapu¹,

SL²,

Gurappagari³

et al. 2022

J Med sci Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome–related corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Most of the infected people experience with mild to moderate respiratory illness and recovering without any special treatment. Present study is intended to identify the number of people infected with COVID-19 at the time of 1st wave (Aug 2020 to Mar 2021), 2nd wave (Apr 2020 to Nov 2021) and 3rd wave (Dec 2021 to Mar 2022) of pandemic situations, also classify the risk category of subjects and future expectations. Total of 67,165 subjects nasopharyngeal swab samples collected from Government General Hospital, Siddipet and Primary Healthcare Centres of all over the Siddipet district, Telangana, India. Out off 67,165 samples during 1st wave 3550 (23.81%) subjects got COVID-19 infection, in that 2341 (15.70%) were males and 1209 (8.11%) were females. During 2nd wave 5697 (16.93%) subjects infected with COVID-19, in that 3566 (10.60%) were males and 2131 (6.33%) were females and during 3rd wave 3064 (16.46%) subjects infected with COVID-19, in that 1968 (10.57%) were males and 1096 (5.89%) were females. In all three time points males were predominantly infected with SARS-CoV2 compare to females. And also 21-40 age group subjects were highly infected at all three time points 1st wave (11.15%), 2nd wave (9.54%) and 3rd wave (8.63%).

show abstract

“…A study conducted in Poland from the beginning of the pandemic to January 2021 found that the increase and decrease in the number of new cases occurred first in patients undergoing HD, although the epidemic trajectory was parallel in HD patients and the general population 10 . Likewise, there is a discrepancy in patient prognosis based on the period evaluated, with some studies indicating that mortality was higher in the second wave than in the first 11 , while others found no differences 12 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hospitalization and mortality during the pandemic in chronic hemodialysis patients and the general population in Peru

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Patients with chronic kidney disease have a higher risk of severe disease and mortality from COVID-19 than the general population. Objective: To compare hospitalization and mortality rates during the pandemic among chronic hemodialysis (HD) patients and the general population in Lima (Peru). Methods: This retrospective cohort included an assessment of the database of chronic HD patients of the health service providers of the social health insurance benefit networks of Lima and Callao between 2019 and 2021. Hospitalization and mortality rates were obtained for every 1,000 individuals, and variations in the percentages of COVID-19 cases and deaths were calculated. These rates were compared with those of the general population data and standardized by age and sex. Results: An average of 3,937 chronic HD patients were evaluated each month. Of these, 4.8% had COVID-19 and 64.97% were mild cases. The hospitalization rates per 1,000 patients were 19.5, 29.28, and 36.7 in 2019, 2020, and 2021, respectively. The mortality rates per 1,000 patients were 5.9, 9.74, and 11.49 in 2019, 2020, and 2021, respectively. When compared to the standardized general population, the peaks of both rates coincided with the plateaus of the waves during the pandemic. The hospitalization rate for COVID-19 was 12 times higher in HD patients than in the general population, and the mortality rate for COVID-19 was twice as high. Conclusion: HD patients had higher hospitalization and standardized mortality rates than the general population. Peaks in hospitalizations and mortality coincided with the plateaus of the first and second waves of the pandemic.

show abstract

Comparison of Outcomes of In-Centre Haemodialysis Patients between the 1st and 2nd COVID-19 Outbreak in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland: A UK Renal Registry Analysis

Cited by 10 publications

References 17 publications

What data collection methods work best for COVID19 outbreak surveillance for people with end stage kidney disease? An observational cohort study using the UK Renal Registry

What data collection methods work best for COVID19 outbreak surveillance for people with end stage kidney disease? An observational cohort study using the UK Renal Registry

Qualitative prevalence assessment of SARS-CoV2 infection by comparing first, second and third wave data: A sentinel surveillance testing centre study

Hospitalization and mortality during the pandemic in chronic hemodialysis patients and the general population in Peru

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About