Prognostic indicators and outcomes of hospitalised COVID-19 patients with neurological disease: An individual patient data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Neurological COVID-19 disease has been reported widely, but published studies often lack information on neurological outcomes and prognostic risk factors. We aimed to describe the spectrum of neurological disease in hospitalised COVID-19 patients; characterise clinical outcomes; and investigate factors associated with a poor outcome. METHODS: We conducted an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of hospitalised patients with neurological COVID-19 disease, using standard case definitions. We invited authors of studies from the first pandemic wave, plus clinicians in the Global COVID-Neuro Network with unpublished data, to contribute. We analysed features associated with poor outcome (moderate to severe disability or death, 3 to 6 on the modified Rankin Scale) using multivariable models. RESULTS: We included 83 studies (31 unpublished) providing IPD for 1979 patients with COVID-19 and acute new-onset neurological disease. Encephalopathy (978 [49%] patients) and cerebrovascular events (506 [26%]) were the most common diagnoses. Respiratory and systemic symptoms preceded neurological features in 93% of patients; one third developed neurological disease after hospital admission. A poor outcome was more common in patients with cerebrovascular events (76% [95% CI 67-82]), than encephalopathy (54% [42-65]). Intensive care use was high (38% [35-41]) overall, and also greater in the cerebrovascular patients. In the cerebrovascular, but not encephalopathic patients, risk factors for poor outcome included breathlessness on admission and elevated D-dimer. Overall, 30-day mortality was 30% [27-32]. The hazard of death was comparatively lower for patients in the WHO European region. INTERPRETATION: Neurological COVID-19 disease poses a considerable burden in terms of disease outcomes and use of hospital resources from prolonged intensive care and inpatient admission; preliminary data suggest these may differ according to WHO regions and country income levels. The different risk factors for encephalopathy and stroke suggest different disease mechanisms which may be amenable to intervention, especially in those who develop neurological symptoms after hospital admission

Prognostic indicators and outcomes of hospitalised COVID-19 patients with neurological disease: An individual patient data meta-analysis

Background Neurological COVID-19 disease has been reported widely, but published studies often lack information on neurological outcomes and prognostic risk factors. We aimed to describe the spectrum of neurological disease in hospitalised COVID-19 patients; characterise clinical outcomes; and investigate factors associated with a poor outcome. Methods We conducted an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of hospitalised patients with neurological COVID-19 disease, using standard case definitions. We invited authors of studies from the first pandemic wave, plus clinicians in the Global COVID-Neuro Network with unpublished data, to contribute. We analysed features associated with poor outcome (moderate to severe disability or death, 3 to 6 on the modified Rankin Scale) using multivariable models. Results We included 83 studies (31 unpublished) providing IPD for 1979 patients with COVID-19 and acute new-onset neurological disease. Encephalopathy (978 [49%] patients) and cerebrovascular events (506 [26%]) were the most common diagnoses. Respiratory and systemic symptoms preceded neurological features in 93% of patients; one third developed neurological disease after hospital admission. A poor outcome was more common in patients with cerebrovascular events (76% [95% CI 67–82]), than encephalopathy (54% [42–65]). Intensive care use was high (38% [35–41]) overall, and also greater in the cerebrovascular patients. In the cerebrovascular, but not encephalopathic patients, risk factors for poor outcome included breathlessness on admission and elevated D-dimer. Overall, 30-day mortality was 30% [27–32]. The hazard of death was comparatively lower for patients in the WHO European region. Interpretation Neurological COVID-19 disease poses a considerable burden in terms of disease outcomes and use of hospital resources from prolonged intensive care and inpatient admission; preliminary data suggest these may differ according to WHO regions and country income levels. The different risk factors for encephalopathy and stroke suggest different disease mechanisms which may be amenable to intervention, especially in those who develop neurological symptoms after hospital admission

Prognostic indicators and outcomes of hospitalised COVID-19 patients with neurological disease: An individual patient data meta-analysis.

BackgroundNeurological COVID-19 disease has been reported widely, but published studies often lack information on neurological outcomes and prognostic risk factors. We aimed to describe the spectrum of neurological disease in hospitalised COVID-19 patients; characterise clinical outcomes; and investigate factors associated with a poor outcome.MethodsWe conducted an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of hospitalised patients with neurological COVID-19 disease, using standard case definitions. We invited authors of studies from the first pandemic wave, plus clinicians in the Global COVID-Neuro Network with unpublished data, to contribute. We analysed features associated with poor outcome (moderate to severe disability or death, 3 to 6 on the modified Rankin Scale) using multivariable models.ResultsWe included 83 studies (31 unpublished) providing IPD for 1979 patients with COVID-19 and acute new-onset neurological disease. Encephalopathy (978 [49%] patients) and cerebrovascular events (506 [26%]) were the most common diagnoses. Respiratory and systemic symptoms preceded neurological features in 93% of patients; one third developed neurological disease after hospital admission. A poor outcome was more common in patients with cerebrovascular events (76% [95% CI 67-82]), than encephalopathy (54% [42-65]). Intensive care use was high (38% [35-41]) overall, and also greater in the cerebrovascular patients. In the cerebrovascular, but not encephalopathic patients, risk factors for poor outcome included breathlessness on admission and elevated D-dimer. Overall, 30-day mortality was 30% [27-32]. The hazard of death was comparatively lower for patients in the WHO European region.InterpretationNeurological COVID-19 disease poses a considerable burden in terms of disease outcomes and use of hospital resources from prolonged intensive care and inpatient admission; preliminary data suggest these may differ according to WHO regions and country income levels. The different risk factors for encephalopathy and stroke suggest different disease mechanisms which may be amenable to intervention, especially in those who develop neurological symptoms after hospital admission

Is COVID-19 associated with self-reported audio-vestibular symptoms?

Objective To determine if a positive test for COVID-19 is associated with self-reported audio-vestibular symptoms. Design Self-reported changes in hearing, tinnitus, hyperacusis, and dizziness/rotatory vertigo were assessed in hospitalised and non-hospitalised COVID-19 patients during and after the acute phase of the disease and compared to non-COVID controls. Study sample There were 150 severe cases of COVID-19 requiring hospital admission and 150 mild cases that were managed at home. Controls were 267 adults, 32 of whom had been hospitalised for a non-COVID-19 condition, and a further 85 who worked in hospital settings. Results Deterioration in hearing and/or tinnitus was reported in 8% of the COVID-19 cases (tinnitus had resolved in 2% after the acute phase), with no significant difference between severe and mild cases. Deterioration in hearing or tinnitus was not significantly different from controls. However, rotatory vertigo was reported by 5% in the COVID-19 groups and 1.1% in the controls, and this difference was statistically significant. Conclusions There is no evidence that COVID-19 results in deterioration in hearing or tinnitus during the acute phase or after recovery in mild or severe cases. However, rotatory vertigo, which could be vestibular in origin, may be a clinical manifestation of COVID-19

Potentially inappropriate prescribing for people with dementia in ambulatory care: a cross-sectional observational study

BackgroundStudies have shown that potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is highly prevalent among people with dementia (PwD) and linked to negative outcomes, such as hospitalisation and mortality. However, there are limited data on prescribing appropriateness for PwD in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, we aimed to estimate the prevalence of PIP and investigate associations between PIP and other patient characteristics among PwD in an ambulatory care setting.MethodsA cross-sectional, retrospective analysis was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Saudi Arabia. Patients who were ≥ 65 years old, had dementia, and visited ambulatory care clinics between 01/01/2019 and 31/12/2021 were included. Prescribing appropriateness was evaluated by applying the Screening Tool of Older Persons Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria. Descriptive analyses were used to describe the study population. Prevalence of PIP and the prevalence per each STOPP criterion were calculated as a percentage of all eligible patients. Logistic regression analysis was used to investigate associations between PIP, polypharmacy, age and sex; odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Analyses were conducted using SPSS v27.ResultsA total of 287 PwD were identified; 56.0% (n = 161) were female. The mean number of medications prescribed was 9.0 [standard deviation (SD) ± 4.2]. The prevalence of PIP was 61.0% (n = 175). Common instances of PIP were drugs prescribed beyond the recommended duration (n = 90, 31.4%), drugs prescribed without an evidence-based clinical indication (n = 78, 27.2%), proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for &gt; 8 weeks (n = 75, 26.0%), and acetylcholinesterase inhibitors with concurrent drugs that reduce heart rate (n = 60, 21.0%). Polypharmacy was observed in 82.6% (n = 237) of patients and was strongly associated with PIP (adjusted OR 24.1, 95% CI 9.0–64.5).ConclusionsFindings have revealed a high prevalence of PIP among PwD in Saudi Arabia that is strongly associated with polypharmacy. Future research should aim to explore key stakeholders’ experiences and perspectives of medicines management to optimise medication use for this vulnerable patient population.<br/

Determinants of Vaccine Hesitancy among Home Health Care Service Recipients in Saudi Arabia

Background: Vaccine hesitancy has been identified by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a major worldwide health threat. Home Health Care (HHC) service recipients represent a vulnerable group and were prioritized to receive coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccination during the national vaccine campaigns in Saudi Arabia. We aimed to investigate the most frequent reasons for vaccine hesitancy among home health care recipients in Saudi Arabia. Methods: This cross-sectional survey was conducted among home health care (HHC) service recipients in Saudi Arabia from February 2022 to September 2022. The behavioral and social drivers (BeSD) model developed by the WHO was used to understand the factors affecting vaccination decision making in our cohort. Results: Of the 426 HHC service recipients enrolled in the study, a third were hesitant to complete the COVID-19 vaccination series. The most prevalent reported reason for COVID-19 vaccine refusal was concerns about the vaccine side effects (41.6%). Factors independently associated with COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy were: having chronic conditions (odds ratio [OR] = 2.59; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.33–5.05, p = 0.005), previous COVID-19 diagnosis (OR = 0.48; 95% CI: 0.28–0.82, p = 0.008), ease of getting the COVID-19 vaccine by themselves (OR = 0.49; 95% CI: 0.28–0.89, p = 0.018), belief in the importance of COVID-19 vaccine in protecting their health (OR = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.38–0.96, p = 0.032), and confidence in the safety of COVID-19 vaccination (OR = 0.38; 95% CI: 0.21–0.69, p = 0.001). Conclusion: Only one-third of the study participants were hesitant to complete the series of COVID-19 vaccination. Understanding the factors underpinning vaccine hesitancy among this group would help healthcare workers and policymakers in developing personalized health awareness campaigns aimed at improving vaccine acceptance levels

Normative and Equated Data of the Original and Basic Versions of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment among Community Dwelling Saudi Arabians

Introduction. Currently, there are standard and basic versions of the MoCA, the latter designed for those with lower educational achievements. Community-based normative data on these versions of the MoCA from Arabic populations are deficient, and there is little data demonstrating how both scales perform in comparison. We aim to obtain normative performances from both versions and equate the measures of both scales. Methods. Community-based recruitment of healthy volunteers≥18 years of age. Participants underwent testing with both versions. Demographic data was collected with regard to age, gender, years of education, diabetes, and hypertension. Regression analysis was performed to determine significance of variables, and the circle-arc equating method was used to equate the two scores from each scale. Results. 311 participants were included in the study. The mean (sd) age was 45.8 (15.96), females were 184 (59.16%), and the duration of education was 12.7 (5.67) years. The mean scores on the MoCA-A and MoCA-B were 21.47 (4.53) and 24.37 (4.71) (P<0.0001), respectively. Multivariate regression showed significance of age and years of education in both versions (both variables with P<0.0001). Correlation coefficient between the two scales was 0.77 (P<0.0001). The largest equated difference between both MoCA versions was four points in those scoring from 10-20 on the MoCA-A. Conclusion. We present normative data from a large Saudi Arabian community-based sample with two different MoCA tests, and an equating graph is presented to determine the corresponding expected performance between the two scales