scholarly journals The association of smoking status with hospitalisation for COVID-19 compared with other respiratory viruses a year previous: A case-control study at a single UK National Health Service trust

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Simons ◽  
Olga Perski ◽  
Lion Shahab ◽  
Jamie Brown ◽  
Robin Bailey
Keyword(s):  
National Health Service ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Respiratory Virus ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Respiratory Viruses ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Current Smoking ◽  
National Health Service Trust ◽  
Control Study

AbstractBackgroundIt is unclear whether smoking increases the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation. We aimed to i) examine the association of smoking status with hospitalisation for COVID-19 compared with hospitalisation for other respiratory virus infections a year previous; ii) compare current smoking in cases with age- and sex-matched London prevalence; and iii) examine concordance between smoking status recorded on the electronic health record (EHR) and the medical notes.MethodsThis retrospective case-control study enrolled adult patients (446 cases and 211 controls) at a single National Health Service trust in London, UK. London smoking prevalence was obtained from the representative Annual Population Survey. The outcome variable was type of hospitalisation (COVID-19 vs. another respiratory virus). The exposure variable was smoking status (never/former/current smoker). Logistic regression analyses adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic position and comorbidities were performed. The study protocol and analyses were pre-registered on the Open Science Framework.FindingsPatients hospitalised with COVID-19 had lower odds of being current smokers than patients admitted with other respiratory viruses (ORadj=0.55, 95% CI=0.31-0.96, p=.04). Odds were equivocal for former smokers (ORadj=1.08, 95% CI=0.72-1.65, p=.70). Current smoking in cases was significantly lower than expected from London prevalence (9.4% vs. 12.9%, p=.02). Smoking status recorded on the EHR deviated significantly from that recorded within the medical notes (χ2(3)=226.7, p<.001).InterpretationIn a single hospital trust in the UK, patients hospitalised with COVID-19 had reduced odds of being current smokers compared with patients admitted with other respiratory viruses a year previous.FundingUK BBSRC, Cancer Research UK, UKPRP.

scholarly journals Association of smoking status with hospitalisation for COVID-19 compared with other respiratory viruses a year previous: a case-control study at a single UK National Health Service trust

F1000Research ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 846
Author(s):  
David Simons ◽  
Olga Perski ◽  
Lion Shahab ◽  
Jamie Brown ◽  
Robin Bailey
Keyword(s):  
National Health Service ◽  
Health Service ◽  
National Health ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Respiratory Viruses ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Outcome Variable ◽  
National Health Service Trust ◽  
Control Study

Background: It is unclear whether smoking increases the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation. We first examined the association of smoking status with hospitalisation for COVID-19 compared with hospitalisation for other respiratory viral infections a year previous. Second, we examined the concordance between smoking status recorded on the electronic health record (EHR) and the contemporaneous medical notes. Methods: This case-control study enrolled adult patients (446 cases and 211 controls) at a single National Health Service trust in London, UK. The outcome variable was type of hospitalisation (COVID-19 vs. another respiratory virus a year previous). The exposure variable was smoking status (never/former/current smoker). Logistic regression analyses adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic position and comorbidities were performed. The study protocol and analyses were pre-registered in April 2020 on the Open Science Framework. Results: Current smokers had lower odds of being hospitalised with COVID-19 compared with other respiratory viruses a year previous (ORadj=0.55, 95% CI=0.31-0.96, p=.04). There was no significant association among former smokers (ORadj=1.08, 95% CI=0.72-1.65, p=.70). Smoking status recorded on the EHR (compared with the contemporaneous medical notes) was incorrectly recorded for 168 (79.6%) controls (χ2(3)=256.5, p=<0.001) and 60 cases (13.5%) (χ2(3)=34.2, p=<0.001). Conclusions: In a single UK hospital trust, current smokers had reduced odds of being hospitalised with COVID-19 compared with other respiratory viruses a year previous, although it is unclear whether this association is causal. Targeted post-discharge recording of smoking status may account for the greater EHR-medical notes concordance observed in cases compared with controls.

scholarly journals Association of smoking status with hospitalisation for COVID-19 compared with other respiratory viruses a year previous: a case-control study at a single UK National Health Service trust

F1000Research ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 846
Author(s):  
David Simons ◽  
Olga Perski ◽  
Lion Shahab ◽  
Jamie Brown ◽  
Robin Bailey
Keyword(s):  
National Health Service ◽  
Health Service ◽  
National Health ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Respiratory Viruses ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Outcome Variable ◽  
National Health Service Trust ◽  
Control Study

Background: It is unclear whether smoking increases the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation. We first examined the association of smoking status with hospitalisation for COVID-19 compared with hospitalisation for other respiratory viral infections a year previous. Second, we examined the concordance between smoking status recorded on the electronic health record (EHR) and the contemporaneous medical notes. Methods: This case-control study enrolled adult patients (446 cases and 211 controls) at a single National Health Service trust in London, UK. The outcome variable was type of hospitalisation (COVID-19 vs. another respiratory virus a year previous). The exposure variable was smoking status (never/former/current smoker). Logistic regression analyses adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic position and comorbidities were performed. The study protocol and analyses were pre-registered in April 2020 on the Open Science Framework. Results: Current smokers had lower odds of being hospitalised with COVID-19 compared with other respiratory viruses a year previous (ORadj=0.55, 95% CI=0.31-0.96, p=.04). There was no significant association among former smokers (ORadj=1.08, 95% CI=0.72-1.65, p=.70). Smoking status recorded on the EHR (compared with the contemporaneous medical notes) was incorrectly recorded for 168 (79.6%) controls (χ2(3)=256.5, p=<0.001) and 60 cases (13.5%) (χ2(3)=34.2, p=<0.001). Conclusions: In a single UK hospital trust, current smokers had reduced odds of being hospitalised with COVID-19 compared with other respiratory viruses a year previous, although it is unclear whether this association is causal. Targeted post-discharge recording of smoking status may account for the greater EHR-medical notes concordance observed in cases compared with controls.

scholarly journals Etiology of Pediatric Fever in Western Kenya: A Case–Control Study of Falciparum Malaria, Respiratory Viruses, and Streptococcal Pharyngitis

2015 ◽  
Vol 92 (5) ◽  
pp. 1030-1037 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy P. O'Meara ◽  
Diana Menya ◽  
Steve M. Taylor ◽  
Thomas L. Holland ◽  
Christopher W. Woods ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Falciparum Malaria ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Respiratory Viruses ◽  
Streptococcal Pharyngitis ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Western Kenya ◽  
Control Study

Evaluating the efficacy of topical vancomycin powder in the treatment of open lower extremity fractures

Trauma ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 146040862097814
Author(s):  
Justin Vaida ◽  
Alexander DB Conti ◽  
Justin J Ray ◽  
Daniel A Bravin ◽  
Michelle A Bramer
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Wound Complications ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Retrospective Case ◽  
Vancomycin Powder ◽  
Control Study

Introduction Optimal management of lower extremity fractures includes early antibiotics administration, thorough irrigation and debridement, consideration of soft tissue injury, and definitive skeletal management. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of topical vancomycin powder in the treatment of open lower extremity fractures. Methods This was a retrospective case control study in which open lower extremity fractures at our institution were reviewed for development of infection (including species and sensitivity if present) and the development of unanticipated wound complications requiring intervention. Patients from 2010-2015 were treated with standard of care consistent with evidence-based literature (IV antibiotics with external fixator, intramedullary nail, etc.). Patients from 2016–18 were additionally treated with vancomycin powder applied directly to the wound before closure. All patients were monitored per the treating surgeon’s standard follow-up protocol and had follow-up of at least two months. Results This retrospective case control study comprised 434 patients. The historical control group (n = 388 patients) and treatment group (n = 46 patients) were similar for age, sex, BMI (body mass index), diabetes, smoking status, and Injury Severity Score (ISS). There were 36 infections (9.28%) in the control group compared to four infections (8.70%) in the vancomycin powder group (p = 0.901). No significant difference was seen after adjusting for age, sex, BMI, diabetes, smoking status, and ISS. The vancomycin powder group experienced significantly more wound complications (15.2%) compared to the control group (6.4%; p = 0.039), which remained significant when adjusting for multiple covariates. Conclusions Topical vancomycin powder did not reduce the infection rate when applied in the surgical site of open lower extremity fractures. Instead, the addition of topical vancomycin powder resulted in significantly more wound complications in patients with open lower extremity fractures.

Plasma Magnesium Concentrations and Risk of Incident Cancer in Adults with Hypertension: A Nested Case-Control Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 76 (5) ◽  
pp. 304-312
Author(s):  
Tengfei Lin ◽  
Chonglei Bi ◽  
Yun Song ◽  
Huiyuan Guo ◽  
Lishun Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Case Control Study ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Cancer Site ◽  
Incident Cancer ◽  
Plasma Magnesium ◽  
Nested Case Control ◽  
Risk Of Cancer ◽  
Control Study

<b><i>Objective:</i></b> The association between plasma magnesium and risk of incident cancer remains inconclusive in previous studies. We aimed to investigate the prospective relationship of baseline plasma magnesium concentrations with the risk of incident cancer and to examine possible effect modifiers. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A nested case-control study with 228 incident cancer cases and 228 matched controls was conducted using data from the China Stroke Primary Prevention Trial (CSPPT), a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial, conducted from May 2008 to August 2013. Study outcomes included incident cancer and its subtypes. <b><i>Results:</i></b> When plasma magnesium concentrations were assessed as quartiles, a significantly higher incident risk of total cancer was found in participants in quartile 1 (&#x3c;0.76 mmol/L; odds ratio [OR] = 2.70; 95% CI: 1.33–5.49) and quartile 4 (≥0.89 mmol/L; OR = 2.05; 95% CI: 1.12–3.76), compared with those in quartile 3 (0.83 to &#x3c;0.89 mmol/L). In cancer site-specific analyses, similar trends were found for gastrointestinal cancer, esophageal cancer, gastric cancer, breast cancer, lung cancer, and other cancers. Furthermore, none of the variables, including age, sex, current smoking status, current alcohol intake, BMI, systolic blood pressure, and total cholesterol levels at baseline significantly modified the association between plasma magnesium and cancer risk. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Both low and high plasma magnesium concentrations were significantly associated with an increased incident risk of cancer, compared with the reference concentrations of 0.83 to &#x3c;0.89 mmol/L among hypertensive adults.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document