Introduction: Patients affected with severe forms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) suffer from a wide range of sequelae, from limited airway diseases to multiple organ failure. These sequelae... Show moreIntroduction: Patients affected with severe forms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) suffer from a wide range of sequelae, from limited airway diseases to multiple organ failure. These sequelae may create exercise limitation, impair the daily activity and thus impact the mental health and the social life. However, the extent of functional limitations and depressive symptoms are understudied especially in patients with COVID-19 after intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalization. Methods: The Intermediate versus Standard-dose Prophylactic anticoagulation In cRitically-ill pATIents with COVID-19: An opeN label randomized controlled trial (INSPIRATION) was a clinical trial that randomized ICU patients with COVID-19 to intermediate-dose vs standard-dose anticoagulation. In the current study, we assessed the interval change in 30-day and 90-day functional limitations based on the post-COVID-19 functional status scale (PCFS) and depressive symptoms based on the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) in the trial participants. We also assessed the effect of intermediate-dose vs standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation on the functional outcomes and depressive symptoms. Results: Of 600 randomized patients in INSPIRATION, 375 (age: 62 years; 42% women) participated in the functional status study. 195 patients died during the 90-day follow up (191 by day 30). Among survivors, between day 30 and day 90, the proportion of patients with moderate-to-severe functional limitation (PCSF grade 3-or-4) decreased from 20.0% to 4.8% (P <0.001) and PHQ-2 >= 3 decreased from 25.5% to 16.6% (P = 0.05). The proportion of patients with no functional limitations (PCFS grade 0) increased (4.2% to 15.4%, P<0.001). Intermediate-dose compared with standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation did not impact the 90-day proportion of patients with PCFS grade 3-or-4 (5.3% vs 4.2%; odds ratio (OR), 1.20, [95% CI, 0.46-3.11]; P = 0.80) or PHQ-2 >= 3 (17.9% vs 15.3%; OR, 1.14, [95% CI, 0.79-1.65]; P = 0.14), with similar results when accounting for study center. Conclusion: In patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU, functional limitations and depressive symptoms were common at 30-day follow-up and had some improvement by 90-day follow-up among survivors. Intermediate-dose compared to standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation did not improve functional outcomes. Show less
Doesschate, T. ten; Vaart, T.W. van der; Debisarun, P.A.; Taks, E.; Moorlag, S.J.C.F.M.; Paternotte, N.; ... ; Werkhoven, C.H. van 2022
Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic increases healthcare worker (HCW) absenteeism. The bacillus Calmette-Gue?rin (BCG) vaccine may provide non-specific protection against respiratory infections... Show moreObjectives: The COVID-19 pandemic increases healthcare worker (HCW) absenteeism. The bacillus Calmette-Gue?rin (BCG) vaccine may provide non-specific protection against respiratory infections through enhancement of trained immunity. We investigated the impact of BCG vaccination on HCW absenteeism during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: HCWs exposed to COVID-19 patients in nine Dutch hospitals were randomized to BCG vaccine or placebo in a 1:1 ratio, and followed for one year using a mobile phone application. The primary endpoint was the self-reported number of days of unplanned absenteeism for any reason. Secondary endpoints included documented COVID-19, acute respiratory symptoms or fever. This was an investigator-funded study, registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03987919). Results: In March/April 2020, 1511 HCWs were enrolled. The median duration of follow-up was 357 person-days (interquartile range [IQR], 351 to 361). Unplanned absenteeism for any reason was observed in 2.8% of planned working days in the BCG group and 2.7% in the placebo group (adjusted relative risk 0.94; 95% credible interval, 0.78-1.15). Cumulative incidences of documented COVID-19 were 14.2% in the BCG and 15.2% in the placebo group (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.94; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.72-1.24). First episodes of self-reported acute respiratory symptoms or fever occurred in 490 (66.2%) and 443 (60.2%) participants, respectively (aHR: 1.13; 95% CI, 0.99-1.28). Thirty-one serious adverse events were reported (13 after BCG, 18 after placebo), none considered related to study medication.Conclusions: During the COVID-19 pandemic, BCG-vaccination of HCW exposed to COVID-19 patients did not reduce unplanned absenteeism nor documented COVID-19. (C) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Show less
Background: The COVID Radar app was developed as a population-based surveillance instrument to identify at-risk populations and regions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The app boasts of >8... Show moreBackground: The COVID Radar app was developed as a population-based surveillance instrument to identify at-risk populations and regions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The app boasts of >8.5 million completed questionnaires, with >280,000 unique users. Although the COVID Radar app is a valid tool for population-level surveillance, high user engagement is critical to the success of the COVID Radar app in maintaining validity. Objective: This study aimed to identify optimization targets of the COVID Radar app to improve its acceptability, adherence, and inclusiveness. Methods: The main component of the COVID Radar app is a self-report questionnaire that assesses COVID-19 symptoms and social distancing behaviors. A total of 3 qualitative substudies were conducted. First, 3 semistructured focus group interviews with end users (N=14) of the app were conducted to gather information on user experiences. The output was transcribed and thematically coded using the framework method. Second, a similar qualitative thematic analysis was conducted on 1080 end-user emails. Third, usability testing was conducted in one-on-one sessions with 4 individuals with low literacy levels. Results: All 3 substudies identified optimization targets in terms of design and content. The results of substudy 1 showed that the participants generally evaluated the app positively. They reported the app to be user-friendly and were satisfied with its design and functionalities. Participants' main motivation to use the app was to contribute to science. Participants suggested adding motivational tools to stimulate user engagement. A larger national publicity campaign for the app was considered potentially helpful for increasing the user population. In-app updates informing users about the project and its outputs motivated users to continue using the app. Feedback on the self-report questionnaire, stemming from substudies 1 and 2, mostly concerned the content and phrasing of the questions. Furthermore, the section of the app allowing users to compare their symptoms and behaviors to those of their peers was found to be suboptimal because of difficulties in interpreting the figures presented in the app. Finally, the output of substudy 3 resulted in recommendations primarily related to simplification of the text to render it more accessible and comprehensible for individuals with low literacy levels Conclusions: The convenience of app use, enabling personal adjustments of the app experience, and considering motivational factors for continued app use (ie, altruism and collectivism) were found to be crucial to procuring and maintaining a population of active users of the COVID Radar app. Further, there seems to be a need to increase the accessibility of public health tools for individuals with low literacy levels. These results can be used to improve the this and future public health apps and improve the representativeness of their user populations and user engagement, ultimately increasing the validity of the tools. Show less
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) or angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are associated with improved outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19... Show moreOBJECTIVES: To determine whether angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) or angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are associated with improved outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 according to sex and to report sex-related differences in renin-angiotensin system (RAS) components. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study comparing the effects of ARB or ACE inhibitors versus no ARBs or ACE inhibitors in males versus females. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 downregulates ACE-2, potentially increasing angiotensin II (a pro-inflammatory vasoconstrictor). Sex-based differences in RAS dysregulation may explain sex-based differences in responses to ARBs because the ACE2 gene is on the X chromosome. We recorded baseline characteristics, comorbidities, prehospital ARBs or ACE inhibitor treatment, use of organ support and mortality, and measured RAS components at admission and days 2, 4, 7, and 14 in a subgroup (n = 46), recorded d-dimer (n = 967), comparing males with females. SETTING: ARBs CORONA I is a multicenter Canadian observational cohort of patients hospitalized with acute COVID-19. This analysis includes patients admitted to 10 large urban hospitals across the four most populated provinces. PATIENTS: One-thousand six-hundred eighty-six patients with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 (February 2020 to March 2021) for acute COVID-19 illness were included. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Males on ARBs before admission had decreased use of ventilation (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.52; p = 0.007) and vasopressors (aOR = 0.55; p = 0.011) compared with males not on ARBs or ACE inhibitors. No significant effects were observed in females for these outcomes. The test for interaction was significant for use of ventilation (p = 0.006) and vasopressors (p = 0.044) indicating significantly different responses to ARBs according to sex. Males had significantly higher plasma ACE-1 at baseline and angiotensin II at day 7 and 14 than females. CONCLUSIONS: ARBs use was associated with less ventilation and vasopressors in males but not females. Sex-based differences in RAS dysregulation may contribute to sex-based differences in outcomes and responses to ARBs in COVID-19. Show less
Background: The COVID Radar app was developed as a population-based surveillance instrument to identify at-risk populations and regions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The app boasts of >8... Show moreBackground: The COVID Radar app was developed as a population-based surveillance instrument to identify at-risk populations and regions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The app boasts of >8.5 million completed questionnaires, with >280,000 unique users. Although the COVID Radar app is a valid tool for population-level surveillance, high user engagement is critical to the success of the COVID Radar app in maintaining validity.Objective: This study aimed to identify optimization targets of the COVID Radar app to improve its acceptability, adherence, and inclusiveness.Methods: The main component of the COVID Radar app is a self-report questionnaire that assesses COVID-19 symptoms and social distancing behaviors. A total of 3 qualitative substudies were conducted. First, 3 semistructured focus group interviews with end users (N=14) of the app were conducted to gather information on user experiences. The output was transcribed and thematically coded using the framework method. Second, a similar qualitative thematic analysis was conducted on 1080 end-user emails. Third, usability testing was conducted in one-on-one sessions with 4 individuals with low literacy levels.Results: All 3 substudies identified optimization targets in terms of design and content. The results of substudy 1 showed that the participants generally evaluated the app positively. They reported the app to be user-friendly and were satisfied with its design and functionalities. Participants’ main motivation to use the app was to contribute to science. Participants suggested adding motivational tools to stimulate user engagement. A larger national publicity campaign for the app was considered potentially helpful for increasing the user population. In-app updates informing users about the project and its outputs motivated users to continue using the app. Feedback on the self-report questionnaire, stemming from substudies 1 and 2, mostly concerned the content and phrasing of the questions. Furthermore, the section of the app allowing users to compare their symptoms and behaviors to those of their peers was found to be suboptimal because of difficulties in interpreting the figures presented in the app. Finally, the output of substudy 3 resulted in recommendations primarily related to simplification of the text to render it more accessible and comprehensible for individuals with low literacy levels.Conclusions: The convenience of app use, enabling personal adjustments of the app experience, and considering motivational factors for continued app use (ie, altruism and collectivism) were found to be crucial to procuring and maintaining a population of active users of the COVID Radar app. Further, there seems to be a need to increase the accessibility of public health tools for individuals with low literacy levels. These results can be used to improve the this and future public health apps and improve the representativeness of their user populations and user engagement, ultimately increasing the validity of the tools. Show less
Ottenheim, N.R.; Pan, K.Y.; Kok, A.A.L.; Jorg, F.; Eikelenboom, M.; Horsfall, M.; ... ; Giltay, E.J. 2022
Background Mental health was only modestly affected in adults during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic on the group level, but interpersonal variation was large. Aims We aim to investigate... Show moreBackground Mental health was only modestly affected in adults during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic on the group level, but interpersonal variation was large. Aims We aim to investigate potential predictors of the differences in changes in mental health. Method Data were aggregated from three Dutch ongoing prospective cohorts with similar methodology for data collection. We included participants with pre-pandemic data gathered during 2006-2016, and who completed online questionnaires at least once during lockdown in The Netherlands between 1 April and 15 May 2020. Sociodemographic, clinical (number of mental health disorders and personality factors) and COVID-19-related variables were analysed as predictors of relative changes in four mental health outcomes (depressive symptoms, anxiety and worry symptoms, and loneliness), using multivariate linear regression analyses. Results We included 1517 participants with (n = 1181) and without (n = 336) mental health disorders. Mean age was 56.1 years (s.d. 13.2), and 64.3% were women. Higher neuroticism predicted increases in all four mental health outcomes, especially for worry (beta = 0.172, P = 0.003). Living alone and female gender predicted increases in depressive symptoms and loneliness (beta = 0.05-0.08), whereas quarantine and strict adherence with COVID-19 restrictions predicted increases in anxiety and worry symptoms (beta = 0.07-0.11).Teleworking predicted a decrease in anxiety symptoms (beta = -0.07) and higher age predicted a decrease in anxiety (beta = -0.08) and worry symptoms (beta = -0.10). Conclusions Our study showed neuroticism as a robust predictor of adverse changes in mental health, and identified additional sociodemographic and COVID-19-related predictors that explain longitudinal variability in mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Show less
Zhang, C.; Adriaanse, M.A.; Potgieter, R.; Tummers, L.; Wit, J. de; Broersen, J.; ... ; Aarts, H. 2022
Background: Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, physical distancing and hand washing have been used as effective means to reduce virus transmission in the Netherlands. However, these... Show moreBackground: Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, physical distancing and hand washing have been used as effective means to reduce virus transmission in the Netherlands. However, these measures pose a societal challenge as they require people to change their customary behaviours in various contexts. The science of habit formation is potentially useful for informing policy-making in public health, but the current literature largely overlooked the role of habit in predicting and explaining these preventive behaviours. Our research aimed to describe habit formation processes of physical distancing and hand washing and to estimate the influences of habit strength and intention on behavioural adherence. Methods: A longitudinal survey was conducted between July and November 2020 on a representative Dutch sample (n = 800). Respondents reported their intentions, habit strengths, and adherence regarding six context-specific preventive behaviours on a weekly basis. Temporal developments of the measured variables were visualized, quantified, and mapped onto five distinct phases of the pandemic. Regression models were used to test the effects of intention, habit strength, and their interaction on behavioural adherence. Results: Dutch respondents generally had strong intentions to adhere to all preventive measures and their adherence rates were between 70% and 90%. They also self-reported to experience their behaviours as more automatic over time, and this increasing trend in habit strength was more evident for physical-distancing than for hand washing behaviours. For all six behaviours, both intention and habit strength predicted subsequent adherence (all ps < 2e-16). In addition, the predictive power of intention decreased over time and was weaker for respondents with strong habits for physical distancing when visiting supermarkets (B = -0.63, p <.0001) and having guests at home (B = -0.54, p <.0001) in the later phases of the study, but not for hand washing. Conclusions: People's adaptations to physical-distancing and hand washing measures involve both intentional and habitual processes. For public health management, our findings highlight the importance of using contextual cues to promote habit formation, especially for maintaining physical-distancing practices. For habit theories, our study provides a unique dataset that covers multiple health behaviours in a critical real-world setting. Show less
Introduction: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic challenged health care systems in an unprecedented way. Due to the enormous amount of hospital ward and intensive care unit (ICU)... Show moreIntroduction: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic challenged health care systems in an unprecedented way. Due to the enormous amount of hospital ward and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, regular care came to a standstill, thereby overcrowding ICUs and endangering (regular and COVID-19-related) critical care. Acute care coordination centers were set up to safely manage the influx of COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, treatments requiring ICU surveillance were postponed leading to increased waiting lists.Hypothesis: A coordination center organizing patient transfers and admissions could reduce overcrowding and optimize in-hospital capacity.Methods: The acute lack of hospital capacity urged the region West-Netherlands to form a new regional system for patient triage and transfer: the Regional Capacity and Patient Transfer Service (RCPS). By combining hospital capacity data and a new method of triage and transfer, the RCPS was able to effectively select patients for transfer to other hospitals within the region or, in close collaboration with the National Capacity and Patient Transfer Service (LCPS), transfer patients to hospitals in other regions within the Netherlands.Results: From March 2020 through December 2021 (22 months), the RCPS West-Netherlands was requested to transfer 2,434 COVID-19 patients. After adequate triage, 1,720 patients with a mean age of 62 (SD = 13) years were transferred with the help of the RCPS West-Netherlands. This concerned 1,166 ward patients (68%) and 554 ICU patients (32%). Overcrowded hospitals were relieved by transferring these patients to hospitals with higher capacity.Conclusion: The health care system in the region West-Netherlands benefitted from the RCPS for both ward and ICU occupation. Due to the coordination by the RCPS, regional ICU occupation never exceeded the maximal ICU capacity, and therefore patients in need for acute direct care could always be admitted at the ICU. The presented method can be useful in reducing the waiting lists caused by the delayed care and for coordination and transfer of patients with new variants or other infectious diseases in the future. Show less
The impact of COVID-19 on population health is recognised as being substantial, yet few studies have attempted to quantify to what extent infection causes mild or moderate symptoms only, requires... Show moreThe impact of COVID-19 on population health is recognised as being substantial, yet few studies have attempted to quantify to what extent infection causes mild or moderate symptoms only, requires hospital and/or ICU admission, results in prolonged and chronic illness, or leads to premature death. We aimed to quantify the total disease burden of acute COVID-19 in the Netherlands in 2020 using the disability-adjusted life-years (DALY) measure, and to investigate how burden varies between age-groups and occupations. Using standard methods and diverse data sources (mandatory notifications, population-level seroprevalence, hospital and ICU admissions, registered COVID-19 deaths, and the literature), we estimated years of life lost (YLL), years lived with disability, DALY and DALY per 100,000 population due to COVID-19, excluding post-acute sequelae, stratified by 5-year age-group and occupation category. The total disease burden due to acute COVID-19 was 286,100 (95% CI: 281,700-290,500) DALY, and the per-capita burden was 1640 (95% CI: 1620-1670) DALY/100,000, of which 99.4% consisted of YLL. The per-capita burden increased steeply with age, starting from 60 to 64 years, with relatively little burden estimated for persons under 50 years old. SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated premature mortality was responsible for a considerable direct health burden in the Netherlands, despite extensive public health measures. DALY were much higher than for other high-burden infectious diseases, but lower than estimated for coronary heart disease. These findings are valuable for informing public health decision-makers regarding the expected COVID-19 health burden among population subgroups, and the possible gains from targeted preventative interventions. Show less
Background: Coagulation abnormalities and coagulopathy are recognized as consequences of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and the resulting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID... Show moreBackground: Coagulation abnormalities and coagulopathy are recognized as consequences of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and the resulting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Specifically, venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been reported as a frequent complication. By May 27, 2021, at least 93 original studies and 25 meta-analyses investigating VTE incidence in patients with COVID-19 had been published, showing large heterogeneity in reported VTE incidence ranging from 0% to 85%. This large variation complicates interpretation of individual study results as well as comparisons across studies, for example, to investigate changes in incidence over time, compare subgroups, and perform meta-analyses. Objectives: This study sets out to provide an overview of sources of heterogeneity in VTE incidence studies in patients with COVID-19, illustrated using examples. Methods: The original studies of three meta-analyses were screened and a list of sources of heterogeneity that may explain observed heterogeneity across studies was composed. Results: The sources of heterogeneity in VTE incidence were classified as clinical sources and methodologic sources. Clinical sources of heterogeneity include differences between studies regarding patient characteristics that affect baseline VTE risk and protocols used for VTE testing. Methodologic sources of heterogeneity include differences in VTE inclusion types, data quality, and the methods used for data analysis. Conclusions: To appreciate reported estimates of VTE incidence in patients with COVID-19 in relation to its etiology, prevention, and treatment, researchers should unambiguously report about possible clinical and methodological sources of heterogeneity in those estimates. This article provides suggestions for that. Show less
Background: Thrombosis is a frequent and severe complication in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Lupus anticoagulant (LA) is a strong... Show moreBackground: Thrombosis is a frequent and severe complication in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Lupus anticoagulant (LA) is a strong acquired risk factor for thrombosis in various diseases and is frequently observed in patients with COVID-19. Whether LA is associated with thrombosis in patients with severe COVID-19 is currently unclear. Objective: To investigate if LA is associated with thrombosis in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Patients/Methods: The presence of LA and other antiphospholipid antibodies was assessed in patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU. LA was determined with dilute Russell's viper venom time (dRVVT) and LA-sensitive activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) reagents. Results: Of 169 patients with COVID-19, 116 (69%) tested positive for at least one antiphospholipid antibody upon admission to the ICU. Forty (24%) patients tested positive for LA; of whom 29 (17%) tested positive with a dRVVT, 19 (11%) tested positive with an LA-sensitive aPTT, and 8 (5%) tested positive on both tests. Fifty-eight (34%) patients developed thrombosis after ICU admission. The odds ratio (OR) for thrombosis in patients with LA based on a dRVVT was 2.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-5.7), which increased to 4.5 (95% CI, 1.4-14.3) in patients at or below the median age in this study (64 years). LA positivity based on a dRVVT or LA-sensitive aPTT was only associated with thrombosis in patients aged less than 65 years (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.3-11.4) and disappeared after adjustment for C-reactive protein. Conclusion: Lupus anticoagulant on admission is strongly associated with thrombosis in critically ill patients with COVID-19, especially in patients aged less than 65 years. Show less
Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, several factors, such as improved hand hygiene, social distancing, and restricted hospital referral, may have had an influence on the epidemiology of... Show moreBackground: During the COVID-19 pandemic, several factors, such as improved hand hygiene, social distancing, and restricted hospital referral, may have had an influence on the epidemiology of Clostridioides difficile infections (CDI). Methods: The annual CDI incidence rate of nine hospitals participating in the Dutch sentinel CI surveillance with complete data was compared between 2020 and the previous five surveillance years. Trends in characteristics of hos-pitalised CDI patients in 21-24 participating hospitals were compared between the first (March 13-May 12, 2020) or second Dutch COVID-19 wave (September 17, 2020-January 1, 2021) and the same calendar periods in 2015 through 2019. All analyses were adjusted for trend changes over time. Findings: The annual CDI incidence rate in 2020 was lower compared to previous years. During the second wave, the percentage of CDI patients with severe CDI was higher compared to earlier (25.8% in 2020 vs 17.9% in 2015-2019 (RR 1.6; 95%CI 1.1-2.3)). After adjustment for delayed C. difficile diagnostics (>= 8 days from start symptoms), the increase disappeared. Delayed C. difficile diagnostics was indeed more common during the second wave (RR 1.7; 95%CI 1.1-2.6), but only for community-onset CDI (CO-CDI). Interpretation: This study shows that a higher percentage of severe CDI cases was observed during the second COVID-19 wave. This may partially be caused by delayed diagnostics, potentially due to decreased visits to a physi-cian or restricted hospital referral for CO-CDI patients. Funding Dutch ministry of Health. Copyright (C) 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Show less
Hassan, S.; Ramspek, C.L.; Ferrari, B.; Diepen, M. van; Rossio, R.; Knevel, R.; ... ; COVID-19 Network Working Grp 2022
Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presents an urgent threat to global health. Prediction models that accurately estimate mortality risk in hospitalized patients could assist... Show moreBackground: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presents an urgent threat to global health. Prediction models that accurately estimate mortality risk in hospitalized patients could assist medical staff in treatment and allocating limited resources. Aims: To externally validate two promising previously published risk scores that predict in-hospital mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Methods: Two prospective cohorts were available; a cohort of 1028 patients admitted to one of nine hospitals in Lombardy, Italy (the Lombardy cohort) and a cohort of 432 patients admitted to a hospital in Leiden, the Netherlands (the Leiden cohort). The endpoint was in-hospital mortality. All patients were adult and testedCOVID-19 PCR-positive. Model discrimination and calibration were assessed. Results: The C-statistic of the 4C mortality score was good in the Lombardy cohort (0.85, 95CI: 0.82-0.89) and in the Leiden cohort (0.87, 95CI: 0.80-0.94). Model calibration was acceptable in the Lombardy cohort but poor in the Leiden cohort due to the model systematically overpredicting the mortality risk for all patients. The C -sta-tistic of the CURB-65 score was good in the Lombardy cohort (0.80, 95CI: 0.75-0.85) and in the Leiden cohort (0.82, 95CI: 0.76-0.88). The mortality rate in the CURB-65 development cohort was much lower than the mortality rate in the Lombardy cohort. A similar but less pronounced trend was found for patients in the Leiden cohort. Conclusion: Although performances did not differ greatly, the 4C mortality score showed the best performance. However, because of quickly changing circumstances, model recalibration may be necessary before using the 4C mortality score. Show less
Zhang, C.; Wang, S.H.; Sang, E.T.K.; Adriaanse, M.A.; Tummers, L.; Schraagen, M.; ... ; Aarts, H. 2022
BackgroundSocial distancing has been implemented by many countries to curb the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding public support for this policy calls for effective and efficient methods of... Show moreBackgroundSocial distancing has been implemented by many countries to curb the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding public support for this policy calls for effective and efficient methods of monitoring public opinion on social distancing. Twitter analysis has been suggested as a cheaper and faster-responding alternative to traditional survey methods. The current empirical evidence is mixed in terms of the correspondence between the two methods. ObjectiveWe aim to compare the two methods in the context of monitoring the Dutch public's opinion on social distancing. For this comparison, we quantified the temporal and spatial variations in public opinion and their sensitivities to critical events using data from both Dutch Twitter users and respondents from a longitudinal survey. MethodsA longitudinal survey on a representative Dutch sample (n = 1,200) was conducted between July and November 2020 to measure opinions on social distancing weekly. From the same period, near 100,000 Dutch tweets were categorized as supporting or rejecting social distancing based on a model trained with annotated data. Average stances for the 12 Dutch provinces and over the 20 weeks were computed from the two data sources and were compared through visualizations and statistical analyses. ResultsBoth data sources suggested strong support for social distancing, but public opinion was much more varied among tweets than survey responses. Both data sources showed an increase in public support for social distancing over time, and a strong temporal correspondence between them was found for most of the provinces. In addition, the survey but not Twitter data revealed structured differences among the 12 provinces, while the two data sources did not correspond much spatially. Finally, stances estimated from tweets were more sensitive to critical events happened during the study period. ConclusionsOur findings indicate consistencies between Twitter data analysis and survey methods in describing the overall stance on social distancing and temporal trends. The lack of spatial correspondence may imply limitations in the data collections and calls for surveys with larger regional samples. For public health management, Twitter analysis can be used to complement survey methods, especially for capturing public's reactivities to critical events amid the current pandemic. Show less
Three preregistered experiments examined to what extent information about an epidemic situation provided by experts and information about anti-infection policies promoted by governments/media... Show moreThree preregistered experiments examined to what extent information about an epidemic situation provided by experts and information about anti-infection policies promoted by governments/media influenced anti-infection behaviors. The above effects were examined among populations from different countries (in Experiments 2 and 3) and across self-construals (in Experiment 3). In three experiments, participants (N =706) were presented with a scenario where experts provided (or did not provide) information about an epidemic situation and governments/media promoted (or did not promote) information about anti-infection policies. After that, participants indicated their willingness to adopt anti-infection behaviors. Results across three experiments showed that both types of information independently increased participants’ anti-infection behaviors. In Experiments 2 and 3, we further found that the epidemic information had a larger impact on inducing anti-infection behaviors than the policy information, which was robust and consistent across countries and self-construals. Findings were discussed under the framework of social influence and in terms of practical implications for pandemic situations like the COVID-19. Show less
Sustic, T.; Coillie, J. van; Larsen, M.D.; Derksen, N.I.L.; Szittner, Z.; Nouta, J.; ... ; Vidarsson, G. 2022
Background: Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies serve a crucial immuno-protective function mediated by IgG Fc receptors (Fc gamma R). Absence of fucose on the highly conserved N-linked glycan in the... Show moreBackground: Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies serve a crucial immuno-protective function mediated by IgG Fc receptors (Fc gamma R). Absence of fucose on the highly conserved N-linked glycan in the IgG Fc domain strongly enhances IgG binding and activation of myeloid and natural killer (NK) cell Fc gamma Rs. Although afucosylated IgG can provide increased protection (malaria and HIV), it also boosts immunopathologies in alloimmune diseases, COVID-19 and dengue fever. Quantifying IgG fucosylation currently requires sophisticated methods such as liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) and extensive analytical skills reserved to highly specialized laboratories. Methods: Here, we introduce the Fucose-sensitive Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for Antigen-Specific IgG (FEASI), an immunoassay capable of simultaneously quantitating and qualitatively determining IgG responses. FEASI is a two-tier immunoassay; the first assay is used to quantify antigen-specific IgG (IgG ELISA), while the second gives Fc gamma RIIIa binding-dependent readout which is highly sensitive to both the IgG quantity and the IgG Fc fucosylation (Fc gamma R-IgG ELISA). Findings: IgG Fc fucosylation levels, independently determined by LC-MS and FEASI, in COVID-19 responses to the spike (S) antigen, correlated very strongly by simple linear regression (R-2=0.93, p < 0.0001). The FEASI method was then used to quantify IgG levels and fucosylation in COVID-19 convalescent plasma which was independently validated by LC-MS. Interpretation: FEASI can be reliably implemented to measure relative and absolute IgG Fc fucosylation and quantify binding of antigen-specific IgG to Fc gamma R in a high-throughput manner accessible to all diagnostic and research laboratories. Copyright (c) 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Show less
Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, several home monitoring programs have described the success of reducing hospital admissions, but only a few studies have investigated the experiences of... Show moreBackground: During the COVID-19 pandemic, several home monitoring programs have described the success of reducing hospital admissions, but only a few studies have investigated the experiences of patients and health care professionals.Objective: The objective of our study was to determine patients' and health care professionals' experiences and satisfaction with employing the COVID-box.Methods: In this single-center, retrospective, observational study, patients and health care professionals were asked to anonymously fill out multiple-choice questionnaires with questions on a 5-point or 10-point Likert scale. The themes addressed by patients were the sense of reassurance and safety, experiences with teleconsultations, their appreciation for staying at home, and the instructions for using the COVID-box. The themes addressed by health care professionals who treated patients with the COVID-box were the characteristics of the COVID-box, the technical support service and general satisfaction, and their expectations and support for this telemonitoring concept. Scores were interpreted as insufficient (<= 2 or <= 5, respectively), sufficient (3 or 6-7, respectively), or good (>= 4 or >= 8, respectively) on a 5-point or 10-point Likert scale.Results: A total of 117 patients and 25 health care professionals filled out the questionnaires. The median score was 4 (IQR 4-5) for the sense of safety, the appreciation for staying at home, and experiences with teleconsultations, with good scores from 76.5% (88/115), 86% (56/65), and 83.6% (92/110) of the patients, respectively. Further, 74.4% (87/117) of the patients scored the home monitoring program with a score of >= 8. Health care professionals scored the COVID-box with a minimum median score of 7 (IQR 7-10) on a 10-point scale for all domains (ie, the characteristics of the COVID-box and the technical support service and general satisfaction). For the sense of safety, user-friendliness, and additional value of the COVID-box, the median scores were 8 (IQR 8-10), 8 (IQR 7-9), and 10 (IQR 8-10), respectively, with good scores from 86% (19/22), 75% (15/20), and 96% (24/25) of the health care professionals, respectively. All health care professionals (25/25, 100%) gave a score of >= 8 for supporting this home monitoring concept, with a median score of 10 (IQR 10-10).Conclusions: The positive experiences and satisfaction of involved users are key factors for the successful implementation of a novel eHealth solution. In our study, patients, as well as health care professionals, were highly satisfied with the use of the home monitoring program-the COVID-box project. Remote home monitoring may be an effective approach in cases of increased demand for hospital care and high pressure on health care systems. Show less
Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, several home monitoring programs have described the success of reducing hospital admissions, but only a few studies have investigated the experiences of... Show moreBackground: During the COVID-19 pandemic, several home monitoring programs have described the success of reducing hospital admissions, but only a few studies have investigated the experiences of patients and health care professionals.Objective: The objective of our study was to determine patients’ and health care professionals’ experiences and satisfaction with employing the COVID-box.Methods: In this single-center, retrospective, observational study, patients and health care professionals were asked to anonymously fill out multiple-choice questionnaires with questions on a 5-point or 10-point Likert scale. The themes addressed by patients were the sense of reassurance and safety, experiences with teleconsultations, their appreciation for staying at home, and the instructions for using the COVID-box. The themes addressed by health care professionals who treated patients with the COVID-box were the characteristics of the COVID-box, the technical support service and general satisfaction, and their expectations and support for this telemonitoring concept. Scores were interpreted as insufficient (≤2 or ≤5, respectively), sufficient (3 or 6-7, respectively), or good (≥4 or ≥8, respectively) on a 5-point or 10-point Likert scale.Results: A total of 117 patients and 25 health care professionals filled out the questionnaires. The median score was 4 (IQR 4-5) for the sense of safety, the appreciation for staying at home, and experiences with teleconsultations, with good scores from 76.5% (88/115), 86% (56/65), and 83.6% (92/110) of the patients, respectively. Further, 74.4% (87/117) of the patients scored the home monitoring program with a score of ≥8. Health care professionals scored the COVID-box with a minimum median score of 7 (IQR 7-10) on a 10-point scale for all domains (ie, the characteristics of the COVID-box and the technical support service and general satisfaction). For the sense of safety, user-friendliness, and additional value of the COVID-box, the median scores were 8 (IQR 8-10), 8 (IQR 7-9), and 10 (IQR 8-10), respectively, with good scores from 86% (19/22), 75% (15/20), and 96% (24/25) of the health care professionals, respectively. All health care professionals (25/25, 100%) gave a score of ≥8 for supporting this home monitoring concept, with a median score of 10 (IQR 10-10).Conclusions: The positive experiences and satisfaction of involved users are key factors for the successful implementation of a novel eHealth solution. In our study, patients, as well as health care professionals, were highly satisfied with the use of the home monitoring program—the COVID-box project. Remote home monitoring may be an effective approach in cases of increased demand for hospital care and high pressure on health care systems. Show less
Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, several home monitoring programs have described the success of reducing hospital admissions, but only a few studies have investigated the experiences of... Show moreBackground: During the COVID-19 pandemic, several home monitoring programs have described the success of reducing hospital admissions, but only a few studies have investigated the experiences of patients and health care professionals.Objective: The objective of our study was to determine patients’ and health care professionals’ experiences and satisfaction with employing the COVID-box.Methods: In this single-center, retrospective, observational study, patients and health care professionals were asked to anonymously fill out multiple-choice questionnaires with questions on a 5-point or 10-point Likert scale. The themes addressed by patients were the sense of reassurance and safety, experiences with teleconsultations, their appreciation for staying at home, and the instructions for using the COVID-box. The themes addressed by health care professionals who treated patients with the COVID-box were the characteristics of the COVID-box, the technical support service and general satisfaction, and their expectations and support for this telemonitoring concept. Scores were interpreted as insufficient (≤2 or ≤5, respectively), sufficient (3 or 6-7, respectively), or good (≥4 or ≥8, respectively) on a 5-point or 10-point Likert scale.Results: A total of 117 patients and 25 health care professionals filled out the questionnaires. The median score was 4 (IQR 4-5) for the sense of safety, the appreciation for staying at home, and experiences with teleconsultations, with good scores from 76.5% (88/115), 86% (56/65), and 83.6% (92/110) of the patients, respectively. Further, 74.4% (87/117) of the patients scored the home monitoring program with a score of ≥8. Health care professionals scored the COVID-box with a minimum median score of 7 (IQR 7-10) on a 10-point scale for all domains (ie, the characteristics of the COVID-box and the technical support service and general satisfaction). For the sense of safety, user-friendliness, and additional value of the COVID-box, the median scores were 8 (IQR 8-10), 8 (IQR 7-9), and 10 (IQR 8-10), respectively, with good scores from 86% (19/22), 75% (15/20), and 96% (24/25) of the health care professionals, respectively. All health care professionals (25/25, 100%) gave a score of ≥8 for supporting this home monitoring concept, with a median score of 10 (IQR 10-10).Conclusions: The positive experiences and satisfaction of involved users are key factors for the successful implementation of a novel eHealth solution. In our study, patients, as well as health care professionals, were highly satisfied with the use of the home monitoring program—the COVID-box project. Remote home monitoring may be an effective approach in cases of increased demand for hospital care and high pressure on health care systems. Show less
The most severe COVID-19 infections and highest mortality rates are seen among long-term care residents. To reduce the risk of infection, physical distancing is important. This study investigates... Show moreThe most severe COVID-19 infections and highest mortality rates are seen among long-term care residents. To reduce the risk of infection, physical distancing is important. This study investigates what physical distancing measures were discussed by COVID-19 outbreak teams of Dutch long-term care organizations and what challenges they encountered. The COVID-19 MINUTES study is a qualitative multi-center study (n = 41) that collected minutes of COVID-19 outbreak teams from March 2020 to October 2021. Textual units about distancing measures were selected and analyzed using manifest content analysis for the first wave: early March-early May 2020; the intermediate period of 2020: mid-May-mid-September 2020; and the second wave: late September 2020-mid-June 2021. During all periods, COVID-19 outbreak teams often discussed distancing visitors from residents. Moreover, during the first wave they often discussed isolation measures, during the intermediate period they often discussed distancing staff and volunteers from residents, and during both the intermediate period and the second wave they often discussed distancing among residents. During all periods, less often admission measures were discussed. Challenges persisted and included unrest among and conflicts between visitors and staff, visitors violating measures, resident non-adherence to measures, and staffing issues. The discussed distancing measures and corresponding challenges may guide local long-term care and (inter)national policymakers during the further course of the COVID-19 pandemic, outbreaks of other infectious diseases, and long-term care innovations. Show less
