Multimorbidity and weight loss in obese primary care patients: Longitudinal study based on electronic healthcare records

Objective: To analyse the association between cardiovascular and mental comorbidities of obesity and weight loss registered in the electronic primary healthcare records. Design and setting: Longitudinal study of a cohort of adult patients assigned to any of the public primary care centres in Aragon, Spain, during 2010 and 2011. Participants: Adult obese patients for whom data on their weight were available for 2010 (n=62 901), and for both 2010 and 2011 (n=42 428). Outcomes: Weight loss (yes/no) was calculated based on the weight difference between the first value registered in 2010 and the last value registered in 2011. Multivariate logistic regression models were adjusted for individuals' age, sex, total number of chronic comorbidities, type of obesity and length of time between both weight measurements. Results: According to the recorded clinical information, 9 of 10 obese patients showed at least one chronic comorbidity. After adjusting for covariates, weight loss seemed to be more likely among obese patients with a diagnosis of diabetes and/or dementia and less likely among those with hypertension, anxiety and/or substance use problems (p<0.05). The probability of weight loss was also significantly higher in male patients with more severe obesity and older age. Conclusions: An increased probability of weight loss over 1 year was observed in older obese male patients, especially among those already manifesting high levels of obesity and severe comorbidities such as diabetes and/or dementia. Yet patients with certain psychological problems showed lower rates of weight reduction. Future research should clarify if these differences persist beyond potential selective weight documentation in primary care, to better understand the trends in weight reduction among obese patients and the underlying role of general practitioners regarding such trends

Risk Factors for COVID-19 in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A National, ENEIDA-Based Case–Control Study (COVID-19-EII)

(1) Scant information is available concerning the characteristics that may favour the acquisition of COVID-19 in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess these differences between infected and noninfected patients with IBD. (2) This nationwide case-control study evaluated patients with inflammatory bowel disease with COVID-19 (cases) and without COVID-19 (controls) during the period March-July 2020 included in the ENEIDA of GETECCU. (3) A total of 496 cases and 964 controls from 73 Spanish centres were included. No differences were found in the basal characteristics between cases and controls. Cases had higher comorbidity Charlson scores (24% vs. 19%; p = 0.02) and occupational risk (28% vs. 10.5%; p < 0.0001) more frequently than did controls. Lockdown was the only protective measure against COVID-19 (50% vs. 70%; p < 0.0001). No differences were found in the use of systemic steroids, immunosuppressants or biologics between cases and controls. Cases were more often treated with 5-aminosalicylates (42% vs. 34%; p = 0.003). Having a moderate Charlson score (OR: 2.7; 95%CI: 1.3-5.9), occupational risk (OR: 2.9; 95%CI: 1.8-4.4) and the use of 5-aminosalicylates (OR: 1.7; 95%CI: 1.2-2.5) were factors for COVID-19. The strict lockdown was the only protective factor (OR: 0.1; 95%CI: 0.09-0.2). (4) Comorbidities and occupational exposure are the most relevant factors for COVID-19 in patients with IBD. The risk of COVID-19 seems not to be increased by immunosuppressants or biologics, with a potential effect of 5-aminosalicylates, which should be investigated further and interpreted with caution

Nationwide COVID-19-EII Study : Incidence, Environmental Risk Factors and Long-Term Follow-Up of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease and COVID-19 of the ENEIDA Registry

We aim to describe the incidence and source of contagion of COVID-19 in patients with IBD, as well as the risk factors for a severe course and long-term sequelae. This is a prospective observational study of IBD and COVID-19 included in the ENEIDA registry (53,682 from 73 centres) between March-July 2020 followed-up for 12 months. Results were compared with data of the general population (National Centre of Epidemiology and Catalonia). A total of 482 patients with COVID-19 were identified. Twenty-eight percent were infected in the work environment, and 48% were infected by intrafamilial transmission, despite having good adherence to lockdown. Thirty-five percent required hospitalization, 7.9% had severe COVID-19 and 3.7% died. Similar data were reported in the general population (hospitalisation 19.5%, ICU 2.1% and mortality 4.6%). Factors related to death and severe COVID-19 were being aged ≥ 60 years (OR 7.1, 95% CI: 1.8-27 and 4.5, 95% CI: 1.3-15.9), while having ≥2 comorbidities increased mortality (OR 3.9, 95% CI: 1.3-11.6). None of the drugs for IBD were related to severe COVID-19. Immunosuppression was definitively stopped in 1% of patients at 12 months. The prognosis of COVID-19 in IBD, even in immunosuppressed patients, is similar to that in the general population. Thus, there is no need for more strict protection measures in IBD

Risk Factors for COVID-19 in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A National, ENEIDA-Based Case&ndash;Control Study (COVID-19-EII)

(1) Scant information is available concerning the characteristics that may favour the acquisition of COVID-19 in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess these differences between infected and noninfected patients with IBD. (2) This nationwide case&ndash;control study evaluated patients with inflammatory bowel disease with COVID-19 (cases) and without COVID-19 (controls) during the period March&ndash;July 2020 included in the ENEIDA of GETECCU. (3) A total of 496 cases and 964 controls from 73 Spanish centres were included. No differences were found in the basal characteristics between cases and controls. Cases had higher comorbidity Charlson scores (24% vs. 19%; p = 0.02) and occupational risk (28% vs. 10.5%; p &lt; 0.0001) more frequently than did controls. Lockdown was the only protective measure against COVID-19 (50% vs. 70%; p &lt; 0.0001). No differences were found in the use of systemic steroids, immunosuppressants or biologics between cases and controls. Cases were more often treated with 5-aminosalicylates (42% vs. 34%; p = 0.003). Having a moderate Charlson score (OR: 2.7; 95%CI: 1.3&ndash;5.9), occupational risk (OR: 2.9; 95%CI: 1.8&ndash;4.4) and the use of 5-aminosalicylates (OR: 1.7; 95%CI: 1.2&ndash;2.5) were factors for COVID-19. The strict lockdown was the only protective factor (OR: 0.1; 95%CI: 0.09&ndash;0.2). (4) Comorbidities and occupational exposure are the most relevant factors for COVID-19 in patients with IBD. The risk of COVID-19 seems not to be increased by immunosuppressants or biologics, with a potential effect of 5-aminosalicylates, which should be investigated further and interpreted with caution