NIDO | Centre for Research and Education, Gødstrup Hospital, Hospitalsparken 25, 7400, Herning, Denmark.
Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 82, 8200, Aarhus N, Denmark.
BMC Infect Dis. 2022 May 3;22(1):423. doi: 10.1186/s12879-022-07413-3.
Only a few studies have performed comprehensive comparisons between hospitalized patients from different waves of COVID-19. Thus, we aimed to compare the clinical characteristics and laboratory data of patients admitted to the western part of Denmark during the first and second waves of COVID-19 in 2020. Furthermore, we aimed to identify risk factors for critical COVID-19 disease and to describe the available information on the sources of infection.
We performed a retrospective study of medical records from 311 consecutive hospitalized patients, 157 patients from wave 1 and 154 patients from wave 2. The period from March 7 to June 30, 2020, was considered wave 1, and the period from July 1st to December 31, 2020, was considered wave 2. Data are presented as the total study population, as a comparison between waves 1 and 2, and as a comparison between patients with and without critical COVID-19 disease (nonsurvivors and patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU)).
Patients admitted during the first COVID-19 wave experienced a more severe course of disease than patients admitted during wave 2. Admissions to the ICU and fatal disease were significantly higher among patients admitted during wave 1 compared to wave 2. The percentage of patients infected at hospital decreased in wave 2 compared to wave 1, whereas more patients were infected at home during wave 2. We found no significant differences in sociodemographics, lifestyle information, or laboratory data in the comparison of patients from waves 1 and 2. However, age, sex, smoking status, comorbidities, fever, and dyspnea were identified as risk factors for critical COVID-19 disease. Furthermore, we observed significantly increased levels of C-reactive protein and creatinine, and lower hemoglobin levels among patients with critical disease.
At admission, patients were more severely ill during wave 1 than during wave 2, and the outcomes were worse during wave 1. We confirmed previously identified risk factors for critical COVID-19 disease. In addition, we found that most COVID-19 infections were acquired at home.
仅有少数研究对来自不同波次 COVID-19 的住院患者进行了全面比较。因此,我们旨在比较 2020 年丹麦西部地区在 COVID-19 第一波和第二波期间入院患者的临床特征和实验室数据。此外,我们旨在确定 COVID-19 重症患者的危险因素,并描述感染源的相关信息。
我们对 311 例连续住院患者的病历进行了回顾性研究,其中第一波有 157 例,第二波有 154 例。2020 年 3 月 7 日至 6 月 30 日期间被视为第一波,7 月 1 日至 12 月 31 日被视为第二波。数据以研究人群总数、第一波和第二波之间的比较以及 COVID-19 重症患者(非幸存者和入住重症监护病房的患者)与非重症患者之间的比较呈现。
与第二波相比,第一波 COVID-19 入院患者的病情更严重。与第二波相比,第一波患者入住 ICU 和死亡的比例明显更高。与第一波相比,第二波在医院感染的患者比例下降,而在家中感染的患者比例增加。在第一波和第二波患者的比较中,我们未发现社会人口统计学、生活方式信息或实验室数据的显著差异。然而,年龄、性别、吸烟状况、合并症、发热和呼吸困难被确定为 COVID-19 重症的危险因素。此外,我们观察到重症患者的 C 反应蛋白和肌酐水平显著升高,血红蛋白水平降低。
入院时,第一波患者比第二波患者病情更严重,第一波患者的结局更差。我们证实了 COVID-19 重症的先前确定的危险因素。此外,我们发现大多数 COVID-19 感染是在家中发生的。