4.7 Article

Risk factors and outcomes of COVID-19 in New York City; a retrospective cohort study

Journal

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL VIROLOGY
Volume 93, Issue 2, Pages 907-915

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jmv.26337

Keywords

comorbidities; COVID-19; mechanical ventilation; New York City; survival

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Male gender, age over 60, congestive heart failure, dementia, and having more than two comorbidities are associated with a higher risk of severe outcomes, hospitalization, mechanical ventilation, and death among patients with COVID-19. These patients should be closely monitored.
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic and information on risk factors for worse prognosis is needed to accurately identify patients at risk and potentially provide insight into therapeutic options. In this retrospective cohort study, including 3703 patients with laboratory confirmed COVID-19, we identified risk factors associated with all-cause mortality, need for hospitalization and mechanical ventilation. Male gender was independently associated with increased risk of hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio [ORadj]: 1.62; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.38-1.91)), mechanical ventilation (ORadj: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.08-1.69) and death (ORadj: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.17-1.82). Patients > 60 years had higher risk of hospitalization (ORadj: 5.47; 95% CI: 4.29-6.96), mechanical ventilation (ORadj: 3.26; 95% CI: 2.08-5.11) and death (ORadj: 13.04; 95% CI: 6.25-27.24). Congestive heart failure (ORadj: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.06-2.02) and dementia (ORadj: 2.03; 95% CI: 1.46-2.83) were associated with increased odds of death, as well as the presence of more than two comorbidities (ORadj: 1.90; 95% CI: 1.35-2.68). Patients with COVID-19 of older age, male gender, or having more than two comorbidities are at higher risk of hospitalization, mechanical ventilation and death, and should therefore be closely monitored.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available