scholarly journals COVID-19 Infections and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Multiple Myeloma in New York City: A Cohort Study from Five Academic Centers

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 234-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malin Hultcrantz ◽  
Joshua Richter ◽  
Cara A. Rosenbaum ◽  
Dhwani Patel ◽  
Eric L. Smith ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 290-290
Author(s):  
Malin Hultcrantz ◽  
Joshua Richter ◽  
Cara A. Rosenbaum ◽  
Dhwani Patel ◽  
Eric L. Smith ◽  
...  

The Lancet ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 378 (9794) ◽  
pp. 898-905 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Zeig-Owens ◽  
Mayris P Webber ◽  
Charles B Hall ◽  
Theresa Schwartz ◽  
Nadia Jaber ◽  
...  

BMJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. m1966 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher M Petrilli ◽  
Simon A Jones ◽  
Jie Yang ◽  
Harish Rajagopalan ◽  
Luke O’Donnell ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectiveTo describe outcomes of people admitted to hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) in the United States, and the clinical and laboratory characteristics associated with severity of illness.DesignProspective cohort study.SettingSingle academic medical center in New York City and Long Island.Participants5279 patients with laboratory confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov-2) infection between 1 March 2020 and 8 April 2020. The final date of follow up was 5 May 2020.Main outcome measuresOutcomes were admission to hospital, critical illness (intensive care, mechanical ventilation, discharge to hospice care, or death), and discharge to hospice care or death. Predictors included patient characteristics, medical history, vital signs, and laboratory results. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to identify risk factors for adverse outcomes, and competing risk survival analysis for mortality.ResultsOf 11 544 people tested for SARS-Cov-2, 5566 (48.2%) were positive. After exclusions, 5279 were included. 2741 of these 5279 (51.9%) were admitted to hospital, of whom 1904 (69.5%) were discharged alive without hospice care and 665 (24.3%) were discharged to hospice care or died. Of 647 (23.6%) patients requiring mechanical ventilation, 391 (60.4%) died and 170 (26.2%) were extubated or discharged. The strongest risk for hospital admission was associated with age, with an odds ratio of >2 for all age groups older than 44 years and 37.9 (95% confidence interval 26.1 to 56.0) for ages 75 years and older. Other risks were heart failure (4.4, 2.6 to 8.0), male sex (2.8, 2.4 to 3.2), chronic kidney disease (2.6, 1.9 to 3.6), and any increase in body mass index (BMI) (eg, for BMI >40: 2.5, 1.8 to 3.4). The strongest risks for critical illness besides age were associated with heart failure (1.9, 1.4 to 2.5), BMI >40 (1.5, 1.0 to 2.2), and male sex (1.5, 1.3 to 1.8). Admission oxygen saturation of <88% (3.7, 2.8 to 4.8), troponin level >1 (4.8, 2.1 to 10.9), C reactive protein level >200 (5.1, 2.8 to 9.2), and D-dimer level >2500 (3.9, 2.6 to 6.0) were, however, more strongly associated with critical illness than age or comorbidities. Risk of critical illness decreased significantly over the study period. Similar associations were found for mortality alone.ConclusionsAge and comorbidities were found to be strong predictors of hospital admission and to a lesser extent of critical illness and mortality in people with covid-19; however, impairment of oxygen on admission and markers of inflammation were most strongly associated with critical illness and mortality. Outcomes seem to be improving over time, potentially suggesting improvements in care.


2020 ◽  
Vol 173 (10) ◽  
pp. 855-858 ◽  
Author(s):  
Parag Goyal ◽  
Joanna Bryan Ringel ◽  
Mangala Rajan ◽  
Justin J. Choi ◽  
Laura C. Pinheiro ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 179 ◽  
pp. 124-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Siegler ◽  
Zina Huxley-Reicher ◽  
Lara Maldjian ◽  
Robyn Jordan ◽  
Chloe Oliver ◽  
...  

10.2196/20786 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (9) ◽  
pp. e20786 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashwin Ramaswamy ◽  
Miko Yu ◽  
Siri Drangsholt ◽  
Eric Ng ◽  
Patrick J Culligan ◽  
...  

Background New York City was the international epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic. Health care providers responded by rapidly transitioning from in-person to video consultations. Telemedicine (ie, video visits) is a potentially disruptive innovation; however, little is known about patient satisfaction with this emerging alternative to the traditional clinical encounter. Objective This study aimed to determine if patient satisfaction differs between video and in-person visits. Methods In this retrospective observational cohort study, we analyzed 38,609 Press Ganey patient satisfaction survey outcomes from clinic encounters (620 video visits vs 37,989 in-person visits) at a single-institution, urban, quaternary academic medical center in New York City for patients aged 18 years, from April 1, 2019, to March 31, 2020. Time was categorized as pre–COVID-19 and COVID-19 (before vs after March 4, 2020). Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests and multivariable linear regression were used for hypothesis testing and statistical modeling, respectively. Results We experienced an 8729% increase in video visit utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the same period last year. Video visit Press Ganey scores were significantly higher than in-person visits (94.9% vs 92.5%; P<.001). In adjusted analyses, video visits (parameter estimate [PE] 2.18; 95% CI 1.20-3.16) and the COVID-19 period (PE 0.55; 95% CI 0.04-1.06) were associated with higher patient satisfaction. Younger age (PE –2.05; 95% CI –2.66 to –1.22), female gender (PE –0.73; 95% CI –0.96 to –0.50), and new visit type (PE –0.75; 95% CI –1.00 to –0.49) were associated with lower patient satisfaction. Conclusions Patient satisfaction with video visits is high and is not a barrier toward a paradigm shift away from traditional in-person clinic visits. Future research comparing other clinic visit quality indicators is needed to guide and implement the widespread adoption of telemedicine.


Cureus ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashutossh Naaraayan ◽  
Abhishek Nimkar ◽  
Sushil Pant ◽  
Amrah Hasan ◽  
Momcilo Durdevic ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 ◽  
pp. 43-50.e4
Author(s):  
Geetanjali R. Kamath ◽  
Anne S. Renteria ◽  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
Emily Jane Gallagher ◽  
Samir Parekh ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document