The COVID-19 Hospitalization Metric in the Pre- and Post-vaccination Eras as a Measure of Pandemic Severity: A Retrospective, Nationwide Cohort Study

Background: COVID-19 hospitalization definitions do not include a disease severity assessment. Thus, we sought to identify a simple and objective mechanism for identifying hospitalized severe cases and to measure the impact of vaccination on trends. Methods: All admissions to a Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital, where routine screening is recommended, between 3/1/2020-11/22/2021 with SARS-CoV-2 were included. Moderate-to-severe COVID-19 was defined as any oxygen supplementation or any SpO2 <94% between one day before and two weeks after the positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Admissions with moderate-to-severe disease were divided by the total number of admissions, and the proportion of admissions with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 was modelled using a penalized spline in a Poisson regression and stratified by vaccination status. Dexamethasone receipt and its correlation with moderate-to-severe cases was also assessed. Results: Among 67,025 admissions with SARS-CoV-2, the proportion with hypoxemia or supplemental oxygen fell from 64% prior to vaccine availability to 56% by November 2021, driven in part by lower rates in vaccinated patients (vaccinated, 52% versus unvaccinated, 58%). The proportion of cases of moderate-to-severe disease identified using SpO2 levels and oxygen supplementation was highly correlated with dexamethasone receipt (correlation coefficient, 0.95), and increased after 7/1/2021, concurrent with delta variant predominance. Conclusions: A simple and objective definition of COVID-19 hospitalizations using SpO2 levels and oxygen supplementation can be used to track pandemic severity. This metric could be used to identify risk factors for severe breakthrough infections, to guide clinical treatment algorithms, and to detect trends in changes in vaccine effectiveness over time and against new variants.

The COVID-19 Hospitalization Metric in the Pre- and Post-vaccination Eras as a Measure of Pandemic Severity: A Retrospective, Nationwide Cohort Study

Background: COVID-19 hospitalization definitions do not include a disease severity assessment. Thus, we sought to identify a simple and objective mechanism for identifying hospitalized severe cases and to measure the impact of vaccination on trends.Methods: All admissions to a Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital, where routine screening is recommended, between 3/1/2020-11/22/2021 with SARS-CoV-2 were included. Moderate-to-severe COVID-19 was defined as any oxygen supplementation or any SpO2 <94% between one day before and two weeks after the positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Admissions with moderate-to-severe disease were divided by the total number of admissions, and the proportion of admissions with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 was modelled using a penalized spline in a Poisson regression and stratified by vaccination status. Dexamethasone receipt and its correlation with moderate-to-severe cases was also assessed. Results: Among 67,025 admissions with SARS-CoV-2, the proportion with hypoxemia or supplemental oxygen fell from 64% prior to vaccine availability to 56% by November 2021, driven in part by lower rates in vaccinated patients (vaccinated, 52% versus unvaccinated, 58%). The proportion of cases of moderate-to-severe disease identified using SpO2 levels and oxygen supplementation was highly correlated with dexamethasone receipt (correlation coefficient, 0.95), and increased after 7/1/2021, concurrent with delta variant predominance.Conclusions: A simple and objective definition of COVID-19 hospitalizations using SpO2 levels and oxygen supplementation can be used to track pandemic severity. This metric could be used to identify risk factors for severe breakthrough infections, to guide clinical treatment algorithms, and to detect trends in changes in vaccine effectiveness over time and against new variants.

Health-related fake news during the COVID-19 pandemic: perceived trust and information search

PurposeHealth-related online fake news (HOFN) has become a major social problem. HOFN can lead to the spread of ineffective and even harmful remedies. The study aims to understand Internet users' responses to HOFN during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic using the protective action decision model (PADM).Design/methodology/approachThe authors collected pandemic severity data (regional number of confirmed cases) from government websites of the USA and China (Studies 1 and 2), search behavior from Google and Baidu search engines (Studies 1 and 2) and data regarding trust in two online fake news stories from two national surveys (Studies 2 and 3). All data were analyzed using a multi-level linear model.FindingsThe research detected negative time-lagged relationships between pandemic severity and regional HOFN search behavior by three actual fake news stories from the USA and China (Study 1). Importantly, trust in HOFN served as a mediator in the time-lagged relationship between pandemic severity and search behavior (Study 2). Additionally, the relationship between pandemic severity and trust in HOFN varied according to individuals' perceived control (Study 3).Originality/valueThe authors' results underscore the important role of PADM in understanding Internet users' trust in and search for HOFN. When people trust HOFN, they may seek more information to implement further protective actions. Importantly, it appears that trust in HOFN varies with environmental cues (regional pandemic severity) and with individuals' perceived control, providing insight into developing coping strategies during a pandemic.

Deviation in the Age Structure of Mortality as an Indicator of COVID-19 Pandemic Severity

Objectives. To test whether distortions in the age distribution of deaths can track pandemic activity. Methods. We compared weekly distributions of all-cause deaths by age during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States from March to December 2020 with corresponding prepandemic weekly baseline distributions derived from data for 2015 to 2019. We measured distortions via Kolmogorov–Smirnov (K-S) and χ2 goodness-of-fit statistics as well as deaths among individuals aged 65 years or older as a percentage of total deaths (PERC65+). We computed bivariate correlations between these measures and the number of recorded COVID-19 deaths for the corresponding weeks. Results. Elevated COVID-19-associated fatalities were accompanied by greater distortions in the age structure of mortality. Distortions in the age distribution of weekly US COVID-19 deaths in 2020 relative to earlier years were highly correlated with COVID fatalities (K-S: r = 0.71, P < .001; χ2: r = 0.90, P < .001; PERC65+: r = 0.85, P < .001). Conclusions. A population-representative sample of age-at-death data can serve as a useful means of pandemic activity surveillance when precise cause-of-death data are incomplete, inaccurate, or unavailable, as is often the case in low-resource environments. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(1):165–168. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306567 )

Has the COVID-19 Pandemic Increased Advance Care Planning Discussions Held by Older Adults?

In an online survey exploring older Canadians’ experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic, 3989 respondents aged 55-99 indicated whether they had discussed their future care preferences and with whom, prior to and since the outbreak. Pre-pandemic, 62% had held such discussions; since the pandemic 43% did so, 11% for the first time. Rates were significantly higher among white respondents than among persons of color, women than men, and those 65+ than younger respondents. Respondents were most likely to have talked, respectively, with their spouse (58% before; 40% since), family (35%; 22%), and friends (12%; 10%)—with higher rates for white, women and older respondents. Surprisingly, only 4% before and 2% since the pandemic had discussed their care preferences with a doctor. Initiation of some new discussions was encouraging but there were fewer than expected, perhaps due to denial, superstition, or disbelief of pandemic severity. Advance care planning remains an under-utilized resource.

Diversity of COVID-19 News Media Coverage across 17 Countries: The Influence of Cultural Values, Government Stringency and Pandemic Severity

The current media studies of COVID-19 devote asymmetrical attention to social media; in contrast, newspapers have received comparatively less attention. Newspapers are an integral source of current information that are syndicated and amplified by social media to a wide global audience. This is one of the first known studies to operationalize news media diversity and examine its association with cultural values during the pandemic. We tracked the global diversity of COVID-19 coverage in a news media database of 12 billion words, collated from 28 million articles over 7000 news websites, across 8 months. Media diversity was measured weekly by the number of unique descriptors of 10 target terms of the pandemic (e.g., COVID-19, coronavirus) and normalized by the corpus size for the respective countries per week. Government Stringency was taken from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker and cultural scores were taken from Hofstede’s Cultural Values global database. Results showed that Media Diversity Rate increased 6.7 times over 8 months, from the baseline period (October–December 2019) to during the pandemic (January–May 2020). Mixed effects modelling revealed that higher COVID-19 prevalence rates and governmental stringency predicted this increase. Interestingly, collectivist cultures are linked to more diverse media coverage during COVID-19. It is possible that news outlets in collectivist societies are motivated to present a diverse array of topics given the impact of COVID-19 on every segment of society. Of broader significance, we provided a framework to design targeted public health communications that are culturally nuanced.

The Influence of COVID-19 on Irrational Consumption Behavior in a Chinese Sample: Based on a Serial Mediating Model

Based on the scarcity theory, this study focuses on exploring the relationship between the severity of public health emergencies (i.e., COVID-19) and individual irrational consumer behaviors through the serial mediating variables of perceived scarcity (PS) and negative mentality (NM). An online questionnaire was used to collect data from participants in China and we obtained 466 effective (115 male and 351 female) questionnaires in total. The findings showed that the relationship between each pair of factors – perceived pandemic severity, PS, NM, and irrational consumption behaviors – was significantly positive. Although the perception of the severity of this public health emergency did not directly predict irrational consumer behavior, the effect was mediated by PS and NM independently and serially. These findings reveal that people who strongly perceive scarcity and are prone to negative attitudes are more likely to demonstrate irrational consumer behaviors (such as rushing to buy and hoard living supplies) once the public perceives a public health emergency as severe. This effect occurs because the PS that results from the epidemic affects people’s cognition, emotion, and behavior.

Pandemic Severity, Policy Stringency, and Tourism Performance: A Global Analysis

This paper investigates the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and its associated policy effects on global tourism performance. Using daily data from 117 countries between January 23, 2020 and June 5, 2021, we applied a fixed-effects panel data model to investigate the impact and its moderators. Results show that COVID-19 cases had a significantly negative effect on tourism revenue and pricing. Specifically, a 10% increase in COVID-19 cases led to a 0.490%, 0.103%, and 0.388% decline in RevPAR, ADR, and occupancy change, respectively. Furthermore, degree of dependence on tourism, and economic support policies moderated this effect. Consequences related to revenue and demand were more remarkable for luxury tourism products than economic ones. Geographical and temporal heterogeneity were also noteworthy, and the impact of pandemic severity on revenue and demand was highly notable in certain periods, such as April and May 2020 and January to mid-March 2021. Lastly, implications are provided.

The COVID-19 Hospitalization Metric in the Pre- and Post-vaccination Eras as a Measure of Pandemic Severity: A Retrospective, Nationwide Cohort Study

Importance: Since the early days of the pandemic, COVID-19 hospitalizations have been used as a measure of pandemic severity. However, case definitions do not include assessments of disease severity, which may be impacted by prior vaccination.Objective: To measure how the severity of respiratory disease changed among inpatients with documented SARS-CoV-2 infection and to measure the impact of vaccination status on these trends, in order to evaluate the accuracy of the metric of “hospitalization plus a positive SARS-CoV-2 test” for tracking pandemic severity.Design: Retrospective cohort of inpatients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2. All data were obtained from electronic health records.Setting: Multi-center, nationwide study conducted in the healthcare system of the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) from March 1, 2020, through June 30, 2021.Participants: All VA patients admitted to a VA hospital with a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within the 14-days prior to admission or during the hospital admission.Main Outcome: Moderate-to-severe COVID-19 disease, defined by use of any supplemental oxygen or documented SpO2 <94%, during an inpatient hospitalization between one day before and two weeks after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test.Exposure: SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status at the time of hospitalization. Patients were regarded as fully vaccinated starting 14 days after receiving the second of a 2-dose regimen or 14 days after receipt of a single-dose vaccine.Results: Among 47,742 admissions in 38,508 unique patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2, N=28,731 met the criteria for moderate-to-severe COVID-19. The proportion with moderate-to-severe disease prior to widespread vaccine availability was 64.0% (95% CI, 63.1-64.9%) versus 52.0% in the later period (95% CI, 50.9-53.2%), p-value for non-constant effect, <0.001. Disease severity in the vaccine era among hospitalized patients was lower among both unvaccinated (55.0%, 95% CI, 53.7-56.4%) and vaccinated patients (42.6%, 95% CI, 40.6-44.8%).Conclusions and Relevance: The proportion of hospitalizations that are due to severe COVID-19 has changed with vaccine availability, thus, increasing proportions of mild and asymptomatic cases are included in hospitalization reporting metrics. The addition of simple measures of disease severity to the case definition of a SARS-CoV-2 hospitalization is a straightforward and objective change that should improve the value of the metric for tracking SARS-CoV-2 disease burden.