Respiratory dysfunction three months after severe COVID-19 is associated with gut microbiota alterations

Background: Although coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is primarily a respiratory infection, mounting evidence suggests that the gastrointestinal (GI) tract is involved in the disease, with gut barrier dysfunction and gut microbiota alterations being related to disease severity. Whether these alterations persist and are related to long-term respiratory dysfunction remains unknown. Methods: Plasma was collected during hospital admission and after three months from the NOR-Solidarity trial (n = 181) and analysed for markers of gut barrier dysfunction and inflammation. At the three-month follow-up, pulmonary function was assessed by measuring the diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (DLCO ). Rectal swabs for gut microbiota analyses were collected (n = 97) and analysed by sequencing the 16S rRNA gene. Results: Gut microbiota diversity was reduced in COVID-19 patients with respiratory dysfunction, defined as DLCO below the lower limit of normal three months after hospitalisation. These patients also had an altered global gut microbiota composition, with reduced relative abundance of 20 bacterial taxa and increased abundance of five taxa, including Veillonella, potentially linked to fibrosis. During hospitalisation, increased plasma levels of lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP) were strongly associated with respiratory failure, defined as pO2 /fiO2 -(P/F ratio)Respiratory dysfunction three months after severe COVID-19 is associated with gut microbiota alterationsacceptedVersio

COVID-19 symptoms at hospital admission vary with age and sex: results from the ISARIC prospective multinational observational study

Background: The ISARIC prospective multinational observational study is the largest cohort of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We present relationships of age, sex, and nationality to presenting symptoms. Methods: International, prospective observational study of 60 109 hospitalized symptomatic patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 recruited from 43 countries between 30 January and 3 August 2020. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate relationships of age and sex to published COVID-19 case definitions and the most commonly reported symptoms. Results: ‘Typical’ symptoms of fever (69%), cough (68%) and shortness of breath (66%) were the most commonly reported. 92% of patients experienced at least one of these. Prevalence of typical symptoms was greatest in 30- to 60-year-olds (respectively 80, 79, 69%; at least one 95%). They were reported less frequently in children (≤ 18 years: 69, 48, 23; 85%), older adults (≥ 70 years: 61, 62, 65; 90%), and women (66, 66, 64; 90%; vs. men 71, 70, 67; 93%, each P < 0.001). The most common atypical presentations under 60 years of age were nausea and vomiting and abdominal pain, and over 60 years was confusion. Regression models showed significant differences in symptoms with sex, age and country. Interpretation: This international collaboration has allowed us to report reliable symptom data from the largest cohort of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Adults over 60 and children admitted to hospital with COVID-19 are less likely to present with typical symptoms. Nausea and vomiting are common atypical presentations under 30 years. Confusion is a frequent atypical presentation of COVID-19 in adults over 60 years. Women are less likely to experience typical symptoms than men

Combination of health care service use and the relation to demographic and socioeconomic factors for patients with musculoskeletal disorders: a descriptive cohort study

Abstract Background Patients with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) access health care in different ways. Despite the high prevalence and significant costs, we know little about the different ways patients use health care. We aim to fill this gap by identifying which combinations of health care services patients use for new MSDs, and its relation to clinical characteristics, demographic and socioeconomic factors, long-term use and costs, and discuss what the implications of this variation are. Methods The study combines Norwegian registers on health care use, diagnoses, comorbidities, demographic and socioeconomic factors. Patients (≥ 18 years) are included by their first health consultation for MSD in 2013–2015. Latent class analysis (LCA) with count data of first year consultations for General Practitioners (GPs), hospital consultants, physiotherapists and chiropractors are used to identify combinations of health care use. Long-term high-cost patients are defined as total cost year 1–5 above 95th percentile (≥ 3 744€). Results We identified seven latent classes: 1: GP, low use; 2: GP, high use; 3: GP and hospital; 4: GP and physiotherapy, low use; 5: GP, hospital and physiotherapy, high use; 6: Chiropractor, low use; 7: GP and chiropractor, high use. Median first year health care contacts varied between classes from 1–30 and costs from 20€-838€. Eighty-seven percent belonged to class 1, 4 or 6, characterised by few consultations and treatment in primary care. Classes with high first year use were characterised by higher age, lower education and more comorbidities and were overrepresented among the long-term high-cost users. Conclusion There was a large variation in first year health care service use, and we identified seven latent classes based on frequency of consultations. A small proportion of patients accounted for a high proportion of total resource use. This can indicate the potential for more efficient resource use. However, the effect of demographic and socioeconomic variables for determining combinations of service use can be interpreted as the health care system transforming unobserved patient needs into variations in use. These findings contribute to the understanding of clinical pathways and can help in the planning of future care, reduction in disparities and improvement in health outcomes for patients with MSDs

Children’s, parents’, and teachers’ experiences of the feasibility of a telerehabilitation intervention for children with acquired brain injury in the chronic phase – a qualitative study of acceptability and participation in the Child In Context Intervention (CICI)

Abstract Background This is a qualitative feasibility study of the Child in Context Intervention (CICI). The CICI is an individualized, goal-oriented and home-based tele-rehabilitation intervention which targets everyday functioning of children (6–16 years) with acquired brain injury in the chronic stage, and their families, one year or more after insult, who have ongoing challenges (physical, cognitive, behavioral, social and/or psychological). The aim of this study is to better understand how children, parents and teachers experienced participation and acceptability; to develop knowledge about the mechanisms of change, and to explore how the CICI was tailored to the context. Methods Six families and schools participated in the intervention, which comprised seven tele-rehabilitation sessions in which the child and parent participated, one in-person parent seminar and four digital school meetings. A multidisciplinary team delivered the intervention to 23 participants over a 4- to 5-month period. The intervention involved psychoeducation about targeted acquired brain injury-related problems, such as fatigue, pain, or social challenges. All but one consented to participate in the current digital interview study. The data were analyzed using content analysis. Results The experience of participation and acceptability varied among the children. Attendance was consistently high; the child participants felt mostly listened to and could influence goal setting and strategies. However, engaging and motivating the child participants proved somewhat challenging. The parents found the CICI rewarding, useful and relevant. However, they had different experiences regarding which intervention component they perceived as most helpful. Some argued in favor of the ‘whole intervention’, while others highlighted new knowledge, SMART goals or the school collaboration. The teachers found the intervention acceptable and useful but wanted a better meeting plan. They had difficulties in finding time for meetings, emphasized the involvement of school leaders, and appreciated the digital format. Conclusions Overall, the intervention was perceived as acceptable, and the participants felt that the various intervention components contributed to improvements. The CICI’s flexibility facilitated tailoring to different contexts based on the children’s functional level. The digital format saved time and provided flexibility regarding the amount of attendance but limited full participation from children with more severe cognitive impairments. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04186182

Art and Its Institutions : Current Conflicts, Critique and Collaborations

"Art and its Institutions is a comprehensive reader on current institutional conditions and the role of institutions within artistic processes, offering a powerful insight into the diversity of art institutions and their practice today" --p.[4] of cover

Rehabilitation for children with chronic acquired brain injury in the Child in Context Intervention (CICI) study: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: Pediatric acquired brain injury (pABI) is associated with long-term cognitive, behavioral, social, and emotional problems, which may affect the quality of life, school, and family functioning. Yet, there is a lack of evidence-based community-centered rehabilitation programs for chronic pABI and these children do not systematically receive comprehensive rehabilitation. The Child In Context Intervention (CICI) study is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT) for children with chronic pABI, which aims to evaluate the effectiveness of an individualized and goal-oriented intervention targeting everyday functioning of the child and family. Methods: Children aged 6–16 years with MRI/CT-verified intracranial abnormalities will be included in the CICI study if they have persistent self- or parent-reported cognitive, emotional, and/or behavioral challenges 1 year or more after insult and attend school regularly. A total of 70 families will be randomized 1:1 to an intervention or a control group. The intervention consists of seven family sessions, one parent seminar, and four school sessions delivered over approximately 6 months. The parent seminar will be held in person, and the other sessions will mainly be video based. The children’s and families’ self-reported major challenges in everyday life will be targeted using SMART goals. Evidence-based strategies, when available, will be applied to achieve the goals, combined with psychoeducation. Goal attainment scaling (GAS) will be used to evaluate goal attainment. Data is collected at baseline and after approximately 6 and 9 months. External assessors are blinded to group allocation. Primary outcomes are parent-reported brain injury symptoms in children and parenting self-efficacy at 9 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes include child-reported brain injury symptoms, quality of life, executive functioning in daily life, parent emotional symptoms, family functioning, and unmet family health care needs. A process evaluation will be conducted. Discussion: The current study provides an innovative approach to rehabilitation for children in the chronic phase of ABI and their families. This complex intervention may contribute to the development of evidence-based, high-quality rehabilitation for a large patient group, which is underrepresented in clinical research. It may also improve collaboration between specialized rehabilitation facilities, schools, and local health care services. Inclusion for the trial started in April 2021

An international observational study to assess the impact of the Omicron variant emergence on the clinical epidemiology of COVID-19 in hospitalised patients

Background: Whilst timely clinical characterisation of infections caused by novel SARS-CoV-2 variants is necessary for evidence-based policy response, individual-level data on infecting variants are typically only available for a minority of patients and settings. Methods: Here, we propose an innovative approach to study changes in COVID-19 hospital presentation and outcomes after the Omicron variant emergence using publicly available population-level data on variant relative frequency to infer SARS-CoV-2 variants likely responsible for clinical cases. We apply this method to data collected by a large international clinical consortium before and after the emergence of the Omicron variant in different countries. Results: Our analysis, that includes more than 100,000 patients from 28 countries, suggests that in many settings patients hospitalised with Omicron variant infection less often presented with commonly reported symptoms compared to patients infected with pre-Omicron variants. Patients with COVID-19 admitted to hospital after Omicron variant emergence had lower mortality compared to patients admitted during the period when Omicron variant was responsible for only a minority of infections (odds ratio in a mixed-effects logistic regression adjusted for likely confounders, 0.67 [95% confidence interval 0.61-0.75]). Qualitatively similar findings were observed in sensitivity analyses with different assumptions on population-level Omicron variant relative frequencies, and in analyses using available individual-level data on infecting variant for a subset of the study population. Conclusions: Although clinical studies with matching viral genomic information should remain a priority, our approach combining publicly available data on variant frequency and a multi-country clinical characterisation dataset with more than 100,000 records allowed analysis of data from a wide range of settings and novel insights on real-world heterogeneity of COVID-19 presentation and clinical outcome

Efficacy and safety of baricitinib in hospitalized adults with severe or critical COVID-19 (Bari-SolidAct): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial

International audienceAbstract Background Baricitinib has shown efficacy in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, but no placebo-controlled trials have focused specifically on severe/critical COVID, including vaccinated participants. Methods Bari-SolidAct is a phase-3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, enrolling participants from June 3, 2021 to March 7, 2022, stopped prematurely for external evidence. Patients with severe/critical COVID-19 were randomised to Baricitinib 4 mg once daily or placebo, added to standard of care. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality within 60 days. Participants were remotely followed to day 90 for safety and patient related outcome measures. Results Two hundred ninety-nine patients were screened, 284 randomised, and 275 received study drug or placebo and were included in the modified intent-to-treat analyses (139 receiving baricitinib and 136 placebo). Median age was 60 (IQR 49–69) years, 77% were male and 35% had received at least one dose of SARS-CoV2 vaccine. There were 21 deaths at day 60 in each group, 15.1% in the baricitinib group and 15.4% in the placebo group (adjusted absolute difference and 95% CI − 0.1% [− 8·3 to 8·0]). In sensitivity analysis censoring observations after drug discontinuation or rescue therapy (tocilizumab/increased steroid dose), proportions of death were 5.8% versus 8.8% (− 3.2% [− 9.0 to 2.7]), respectively. There were 148 serious adverse events in 46 participants (33.1%) receiving baricitinib and 155 in 51 participants (37.5%) receiving placebo. In subgroup analyses, there was a potential interaction between vaccination status and treatment allocation on 60-day mortality. In a subsequent post hoc analysis there was a significant interaction between vaccination status and treatment allocation on the occurrence of serious adverse events, with more respiratory complications and severe infections in vaccinated participants treated with baricitinib. Vaccinated participants were on average 11 years older, with more comorbidities. Conclusion This clinical trial was prematurely stopped for external evidence and therefore underpowered to conclude on a potential survival benefit of baricitinib in severe/critical COVID-19. We observed a possible safety signal in vaccinated participants, who were older with more comorbidities. Although based on a post-hoc analysis, these findings warrant further investigation in other trials and real-world studies. Trial registration Bari-SolidAct is registered at NCT04891133 (registered May 18, 2021) and EUClinicalTrials.eu ( 2022-500385-99-00 )