1
|
Habbous S, Lambrinos A, Ming K, Hellsten E. A cohort study of patients hospitalised with SARS-CoV-2 infection in Ontario: patient characteristics and outcomes by wave. Swiss Med Wkly 2024; 154:3636. [PMID: 38579312 DOI: 10.57187/s.3636] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/07/2024] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Each wave of the COVID-19 pandemic exhibited a unique combination of epidemiological, social and structural characteristics. We explore similarities and differences in wave-over-wave characteristics of patients hospitalised with COVID-19. METHODS This was a population-based study in Ontario province, Canada. Patients hospitalised with SARS-CoV-2 between 26 February 2020 and 31 March 2022 were included. An admission was considered related to SARS-CoV-2 infection if the provincial inpatient or outpatient hospital databases contained the ICD-10 diagnostic codes U071/U072 or the Ontario Laboratories Information System indicated a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result (PCR or rapid antigen testing) during the admission or up to two weeks prior. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality (modified Poisson regression). Secondary outcomes were use of critical care during the admission (logistic regression) and total length-of-stay (linear regression with heteroskedastic-consistent standard-error estimators). All models were adjusted for demographic characteristics, neighbourhood socioeconomic factors and indicators of illness severity. RESULTS There were 73,201 SARS-CoV-2-related admissions: 6127 (8%) during wave 1 (wild-type), 14,371 (20%) during wave 2 (wild-type), 16,653 (23%) during wave 3 (Alpha), 5678 (8%) during wave 4 (Delta) and 30,372 (42%) during wave 5 (Omicron). SARS-CoV-2 was the most responsible diagnosis for 70% of admissions during waves 1-2 and 42% in wave 5. The proportion of admitted patients who were long-term care residents was 18% (n = 1111) during wave 1, decreasing to 10% (n = 1468) in wave 2 and <5% in subsequent waves. During waves 1-3, 46% of all admitted patients resided in a neighbourhood assigned to the highest ethnic diversity quintile, which declined to 27% during waves 4-5. Compared to wave 1, 90-day mortality was similar during wave 2 (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]: 1.00 [95% CI: 0.95-1.04]), but lower during wave 3 (aRR: 0.89 [0.85-0.94]), wave 4 (aRR: 0.85 [0.79-0.91]) and wave 5 (aRR: 0.83 [0.80-0.88]). Improvements in survival over waves were observed among elderly patients (p-interaction <0.0001). Critical care admission was significantly less likely during wave 5 than previous waves (adjusted odds ratio: 0.50 [0.47-0.54]). The length of stay was a median of 8.5 (3.6-23.8) days during wave 1 and 5.3 (2.2-12.6) during wave 5. After adjustment, the mean length of stay was on average -10.4 (-11.1 to -9.8) days, i.e. shorter, in wave 5 vs wave 1. CONCLUSION Throughout the pandemic, sociodemographic characteristics of patients hospitalised with SARS-CoV-2 changed over time, particularly in terms of ethnic diversity, but still disproportionately affected patients from more marginalised regions. Improved survival and reduced use of critical care during the Omicron wave are reassuring.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven Habbous
- Ontario Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Blot S, Ruppé E, Harbarth S, Asehnoune K, Poulakou G, Luyt CE, Rello J, Klompas M, Depuydt P, Eckmann C, Martin-Loeches I, Povoa P, Bouadma L, Timsit JF, Zahar JR. Healthcare-associated infections in adult intensive care unit patients: Changes in epidemiology, diagnosis, prevention and contributions of new technologies. Intensive Crit Care Nurs 2022; 70:103227. [PMID: 35249794 PMCID: PMC8892223 DOI: 10.1016/j.iccn.2022.103227] [Citation(s) in RCA: 82] [Impact Index Per Article: 41.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are at high risk for healthcare-acquired infections (HAI) due to the high prevalence of invasive procedures and devices, induced immunosuppression, comorbidity, frailty and increased age. Over the past decade we have seen a successful reduction in the incidence of HAI related to invasive procedures and devices. However, the rate of ICU-acquired infections remains high. Within this context, the ongoing emergence of new pathogens, further complicates treatment and threatens patient outcomes. Additionally, the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic highlighted the challenge that an emerging pathogen provides in adapting prevention measures regarding both the risk of exposure to caregivers and the need to maintain quality of care. ICU nurses hold a special place in the prevention and management of HAI as they are involved in basic hygienic care, steering and implementing quality improvement initiatives, correct microbiological sampling, and aspects antibiotic stewardship. The emergence of more sensitive microbiological techniques and our increased knowledge about interactions between critically ill patients and their microbiota are leading us to rethink how we define HAIs and best strategies to diagnose, treat and prevent these infections in the ICU. This multidisciplinary expert review, focused on the ICU setting, will summarise the recent epidemiology of ICU-HAI, discuss the place of modern microbiological techniques in their diagnosis, review operational and epidemiological definitions and redefine the place of several controversial preventive measures including antimicrobial-impregnated medical devices, chlorhexidine-impregnated washcloths, catheter dressings and chlorhexidine-based mouthwashes. Finally, general guidance is suggested that may reduce HAI incidence and especially outbreaks in ICUs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stijn Blot
- Dept. of Internal Medicine & Pediatrics, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
| | - Etienne Ruppé
- INSERM, IAME UMR 1137, University of Paris, France; Department of Bacteriology, Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, APHP, Paris, France
| | - Stephan Harbarth
- Infection Control Program, Division of Infectious Diseases, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Karim Asehnoune
- Department of Anesthesiology and Surgical Intensive Care, Hôtel-Dieu, University Hospital of Nantes, Nantes, France
| | - Garyphalia Poulakou
- 3(rd) Department of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Medical School, Sotiria General Hospital of Athens, Greece
| | - Charles-Edouard Luyt
- Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Institut de Cardiologie, Hôpitaux Universitaires Pitié Salpêtrière-Charles Foix, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (APHP), Paris, France; INSERM, UMRS_1166-ICAN Institute of Cardiometabolism and Nutrition, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France
| | - Jordi Rello
- Vall d'Hebron Institut of Research (VHIR) and Centro de Investigacion Biomedica en Red de Enferemedades Respiratorias (CIBERES), Instituto Salud Carlos III, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Michael Klompas
- Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, United States; Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, United States
| | - Pieter Depuydt
- Intensive Care Department, Ghent University Hospital, Gent, Belgium
| | - Christian Eckmann
- Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, Klinikum Peine, Medical University Hannover, Germany
| | - Ignacio Martin-Loeches
- Multidisciplinary Intensive Care Research Organization (MICRO), St. James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland; Hospital Clinic, Universidad de Barcelona, CIBERes, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Pedro Povoa
- Polyvalent Intensive Care Unit, São Francisco Xavier Hospital, CHLO, Lisbon, Portugal; NOVA Medical School, Comprehensive Health Research Center, CHRC, New University of Lisbon, Lisbon Portugal; Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Research Unit of Clinical Epidemiology, OUH Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Lila Bouadma
- INSERM, IAME UMR 1137, University of Paris, France; Medical and Infectious Diseases ICU, Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, APHP, Paris, France
| | - Jean-Francois Timsit
- INSERM, IAME UMR 1137, University of Paris, France; Medical and Infectious Diseases ICU, Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, APHP, Paris, France
| | - Jean-Ralph Zahar
- INSERM, IAME UMR 1137, University of Paris, France; Microbiology, Infection Control Unit, GH Paris Seine Saint-Denis, APHP, Bobigny, France
| |
Collapse
|