Ishan Garg

Seasonal epidemics of respiratory viruses, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), influenza viruses, parainfluenza viruses (PIVs), and human metapneumovirus (MPV) are associated with a significant healthcare burden secondary to hundreds of thousands of hospitalizations every year in the United States (US) alone. Preventive measures implemented to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19 infection), including facemasks, hand hygiene, stay-at-home orders, and closure of schools and local/national borders may have impacted the transmission of these respiratory viruses. In this study, we looked at the hospitalization and mortality trends for various respiratory viral infections from January 2017 to December 2020. We found a strong reduction in all viral respiratory infections, with the lowest admission rates and mortality in the last season (2020) compared to the corresponding months from the past three years (2017–2019). This study highlights the importance of public health interventions implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic, which had far-reaching public health benefits. Appropriate and timely use of these measures may help to reduce the severity of future seasonal respiratory viral outbreaks as well as their burden on already strained healthcare systems.

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted healthcare delivery to patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The aim of our retrospective study was to determine the effect of COVID-19 on inpatient STEMI outcomes and to investigate changes in cardiac care delivery during 2020. We utilized the National Inpatient Sample database to examine inpatient mortality and cardiac procedures among STEMI patients with and without COVID-19. In our study, STEMI patients with COVID-19 had higher inpatient mortality (47.4% vs. 11.2%, aOR: 3.8, 95% CI: 3.2–4.6, p < 0.001), increased length of stay (9.0 days vs. 4.3 days, p < 0.001) and higher cost of hospitalization (USD 172,518 vs. USD 131,841, p = 0.004) when compared to STEMI patients without COVID-19. STEMI patients with COVID-19 also received significantly less invasive cardiac procedures (coronary angiograms: 30.4% vs. 50.8%, p < 0.001; PCI: 32.9% vs. 70.1%, p < 0.001; CABG: 0.9% vs. 4.1%, p < 0.001) and were more likely to receive systemic thrombolytic therapy (4.2% vs. 1.1%, p < 0.001) when compared to STEMI patients without COVID-19. Our findings are the result of complications of SARS-CoV2 infection as well as alterations in healthcare delivery due to the burden of the COVID-19 pandemic.

This study aims to provide comparative data on clinical features and in-hospital outcomes among U.S. adults admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 and influenza infection using a nationwide inpatient sample (N.I.S.) data 2020. Data were collected on patient characteristics and in-hospital outcomes, including patient’s age, race, sex, insurance status, median income, length of stay, mortality, hospitalization cost, comorbidities, mechanical ventilation, and vasopressor support. Additional analysis was performed using propensity matching. In propensity-matched cohort analysis, influenza-positive (and COVID-positive) patients had higher mean hospitalization cost (USD 129,742 vs. USD 68,878, p = 0.04) and total length of stay (9.9 days vs. 8.2 days, p = 0.01), higher odds of needing mechanical ventilation (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.19–3.39), and higher in-hospital mortality (OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.03–4.24) relative to the COVID-positive and influenza-negative cohort. In conclusion, COVID-positive and influenza-negative patients had lower hospital charges, shorter hospital stays, and overall lower mortality, thereby supporting the use of the influenza vaccine in COVID-positive patients.

Venous thromboembolism, in particular, pulmonary embolism (PE), is a significant contributor to the morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19. In this study, we utilized the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database 2020 to evaluate and compare clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 with and without PE. Our sample includes 1,659,040 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia between January 2020 and December 2020. We performed propensity-matched analysis for patient characteristics and in-hospital outcomes, including the patient’s age, race, sex, insurance status, median income, length of stay, mortality, hospitalization cost, comorbidities, mechanical ventilation, and vasopressor support. Patients with COVID-19 with PE had a higher need for mechanical ventilation (25.7% vs. 15.6%, adjusted odds ratio 1.4, 95% CI 1.4–1.5, p < 0.001), the vasopressor requirement (5.4% vs. 2.6%, adjusted OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.4–1.8, p < 0.001), longer hospital stays (10.8 vs. 7.9 days, p < 0.001), and overall higher in-hospital mortality (19.1 vs. 13.9%, adjusted OR of 1.3, 95% CI 1.1–1.5, p < 0.001). This study highlights the need for more aggressive management of PE in COVID-19-positive patients with the aim to improve early diagnosis and treatment to reduce morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs seen in the synchronous COVID-19 and PE-positive patients.

COVID-19 has brought the disparities in health outcomes for patients to the forefront. Racial and gender identity are associated with prevalent healthcare disparities. In this study, we examine the health disparities in COVID-19 hospitalization outcome from the intersectional lens of racial and gender identity. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) 2020 NIS dataset for hospitalizations from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2020 was analyzed for primary outcome of in-patient mortality and secondary outcomes of intubation, acute kidney injury (AKI), AKI requiring hemodialysis (HD), cardiac arrest, stroke, and vasopressor use. A multivariate regression model was used to identify associations. A p value of p = 0.001). We note that the intersection of gender and racial identities has a significant impact on outcomes of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in the United States with Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) men have higher risks of adverse outcomes.

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted healthcare delivery to patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infraction (NSTEMI). The aim of our retrospective study is to determine the effect of COVID-19 on inpatient NSTEMI outcomes and to investigate whether changes in cardiac care contributed to the observed outcomes. After multivariate adjustment, we found that NSTEMI patients with COVID-19 had a higher rate of inpatient mortality (37.3% vs. 7.3%, adjusted odds ratio: 4.96, 95% CI: 4.6–5.4, p < 0.001), increased length of stay (9.9 days vs. 5.4 days, adjusted LOS: 3.6 days longer, p < 0.001), and a higher cost of hospitalization (150,000 USD vs. 110,000 USD, inflation-adjusted cost of hospitalization: 36,000 USD higher, p < 0.001) in comparison to NSTEMI patients without COVID-19, despite a lower burden of pre-existing cardiac comorbidity. NSTEMI patients with COVID-19 also received less invasive cardiac procedures (coronary angiography: 8.7% vs. 50.3%, p < 0.001; PCI: 4.8% vs. 29%, p < 0.001; and CABG: 0.7% vs. 6.2%, p < 0.001). In our study, we observed increased mortality and in-hospital complications to be a combined effect of COVID-19 infection and myocardial inflammation as a result of cytokine storm, prothrombic state, oxygen supply/demand imbalance and alterations in healthcare delivery from January to December 2020.

Seasonal epidemics of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is one of the leading causes of hospitalization and mortality among children. Preventive measures implemented to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2, including facemasks, stay-at-home orders, closure of schools and local-national borders, and hand hygiene, may have also prevented the transmission of RSV and influenza. However, with the easing of COVID-19 imposed restrictions, many regions are noticing a delayed RSV outbreak. Some of these regions have also noted an increase in severity of these delayed RSV outbreaks partly due to a lack of protective immunity in the community following a lack of exposure from the previous season. Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic can be implemented for controlling RSV outbreaks, including: (1) measures to reduce the spread, (2) effective vaccine development, and (3) genomic surveillance tools and computational modeling to predict the timing and severity of RSV outbreaks. These measures can help reduce the severity and prepare the health care system to deal with future RSV outbreaks by appropriate and timely allocation of health care resources.

Various safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines utilizing different platforms (mRNA, adenovirus vector, inactivated virus-based) are available against SARS-CoV-2 infection. A prime-boost regimen (administration of two doses) is recommended to induce an adequate and sustained immune response. Most of these vaccines follow a homologous regimen (the same type of vaccine as priming and booster doses). However, there is a growing interest in a heterologous prime-boost vaccination regimen to potentially help address concerns posed by fluctuating vaccine supplies, serious adverse effects (anaphylaxis and thromboembolic episodes following adenovirus-based vaccines), new emerging virulent strains, inadequate immune response in immunocompromised individuals, and waning immunity. Various studies have demonstrated that heterologous prime-boost vaccination may induce comparable or higher antibody (spike protein) titers and a similar reactogenicity profile to the homologous prime-boost regimen. Based on these considerations, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention has issued guidance supporting the “mix-and-match” heterologous boost COVID-19 vaccine strategy.

Developing safe and effective vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) at a breakneck speed has been an exceptional human achievement. It remains our best hope of containing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. However, newer, more aggressive SARS-CoV-2 viral strains, as well as the possibility of fading immunity following vaccination, have prompted health officials to investigate the necessity for additional immunization. This has put further pressure on disregarded human life in lower-income countries that already have minimal access to COVID-19 vaccines. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have recommended a third COVID-19 vaccine dose in immunocompromised individuals in a recent announcement. Governments and health care officials need to develop usage guidelines for COVID-19 vaccine booster doses while considering the dangers of potential waning immunity and new viral strains and prioritizing vulnerable populations everywhere, including those living in lower-income countries.

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disproportionately impacted lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer (LGBTQ+) people. Despite developing safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines, LGBTQ+ communities still faces challenges due to inequitable access and vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine hesitancy is a delay in the acceptance or refusal of vaccines despite the availability of vaccination services. Various studies have explored and tried to address factors influencing vaccine hesitancy. However, the LGBTQ+ population remains under- and misrepresented in many of these studies. According to the few studies that have focused on the LGBTQ+ population, several factors influencing vaccine hesitancy have been identified, with the most common factors in studies being concern about vaccine safety, vaccine efficacy, and history of bad experiences with healthcare providers. In order to rebuild the confidence of LGBTQ+ people in vaccines, governments, healthcare policymakers, and healthcare providers need to start by acknowledging, and then resolving, these disparities; building trust; dismantling systemic suppression and discrimination; and prioritizing the inclusion of LGBTQ+ people in research studies and public health policies.