• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Int J Med Inform . Using EHR data to identify coronavirus infections in hospitalized patients: Impact of case definitions on disease surveillance

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Int J Med Inform


. 2022 Aug 8;166:104842.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2022.104842. Online ahead of print.
Using EHR data to identify coronavirus infections in hospitalized patients: Impact of case definitions on disease surveillance


Ann Marie Navar[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Irene Cosmatos[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Stacey Purinton[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Janet L Ramsey[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Robert J Taylor[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Rachel E Sobel[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Ginger Barlow[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Gretchen S Dieck[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Michael L Bulgrein[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Eric D Peterson[SUP] 4 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the number, characteristics, and outcomes of patients identified hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using two different case definitions.
Procedures: Electronic Health Record data were evaluated from patients hospitalized with COVID-19 through May 2020 at 52 health systems across the United States. Characteristics of inpatients with positive laboratory tests for SARS-CoV-2 were compared with those with clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 but without a confirmatory lab result.
Findings: Of 14,371 inpatients with COVID-19, 6623 (46.1 %) had a positive laboratory result, and n = 7748 (52.9 %) had only a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19. Compared with clinically diagnosed cases, those with laboratory-confirmed COVID were similar in age and sex, but differed by race, ethnicity, and insurance status. Laboratory-confirmed cases were more likely to receive certain COVID-19 therapies including hydroxychloroquine, anti-IL6 agents and antivirals (p < 0.001). Those with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 had lower rates of most complications such as myocardial infarction, but higher overall mortality (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: We observed a two-fold difference in the number of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 depending on whether the case definition required laboratory confirmation. Variations in case definitions also led to differences in cohort characteristics, treatments, and outcomes.

Keywords: COVID-19; Case definition; Electronic health records.
 
Back
Top Bottom