Comparison between first and second wave of COVID-19 outbreak in older people: The COPE multicentre European observational cohort study

Alessia  Verduri; Roxanna Short; Ben Carter; Philip Braude; Arturo Vilches-Moraga; Terence J Quinn; Jemima Collins; Jane  Lumsden; Kathryn McCarthy; Louis A Evans; Phyo Kyaw Myint; Jonathan Hewitt; COPE Study Team

doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckac108

Comparison between first and second wave of COVID-19 outbreak in older people: The COPE multicentre European observational cohort study

Alessia Verduri^* (Corresponding Author), Roxanna Short, Ben Carter, Philip Braude, Arturo Vilches-Moraga, Terence J Quinn, Jemima Collins, Jane Lumsden, Kathryn McCarthy, Louis A Evans, Phyo Kyaw Myint, Jonathan Hewitt, COPE Study Team

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)

9 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Effective shielding measures and virus mutations have progressively modified the disease between the waves, likewise health care systems have adapted to the outbreak.
Our aim was to compare clinical outcomes for older people with COVID-19 in Wave 1 (W1) and 2 (W2).
Methods: All data, including the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), were collected for COVID-19 consecutive patients, aged ≥65, from thirteen hospitals, in W1 (February-June 2020) and W2 (October 2020-March 2021). The primary outcome was mortality (time to mortality and 28-day mortality). Data were analysed with multilevel Cox proportional hazards, linear and logistic regression models, adjusted for wave baseline demographic and clinical characteristics.
Results: Data from 611 people admitted in W2 were added to and compared with data collected during W1 (N=1340). Patients admitted in W2 were of similar age, median [IQR], W2= 79 [73-84]; W1=80 [74-86]; had a greater proportion of men (59.4% vs 53.0%); had lower 28-day mortality (29.1% vs 40.0%), compared to W1. For combined W1-W2 sample, W2 was independently associated with improved survival: time-to-mortality aHR= 0.78 (95%CI 0.65-0.93), 28-day mortality aOR=0.80 (95%CI 0.62-1.03). W2 was associated with increased length of hospital stay aHR=0.69 (95%CI 0.59-0.81). Patients in W2 were less
frail, CFS (adjusted mean difference [aMD]=-0.50, 95%CI -0.81, -0.18), as well as presented with lower CRP (aMD=-22.52, 95%CI -32.00, -13.04).
Conclusions: COVID-19 older adults in W2 were less likely to die than during W1. Patients presented to hospital during W2 were less frail and with lower disease severity and less likely to have renal decline.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	807–812
Number of pages	6
Journal	European Journal of Public Health
Volume	32
Issue number	5
Early online date	23 Aug 2022
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac108
Publication status	Published - Oct 2022

Bibliographical note

Funding
This study received no specific funding. The work was partially supported through the NIHR Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre at the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust in partnership with King's College London (BC).
Acknowledgments
Contributions of authors
All authors contributed to the interpretation of results and in making an important intellectual contribution to the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. JH conceived the concept of the study. BC managed the project, AV did the literature review. BC and RS did data analysis and interpreted the findings and RS did statistical analysis and graphics. AV, BC, JH, RS wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript. JH is the guarantor of the study.

Data Availability Statement

Supplementary data are available at EURPUB online.

Keywords

COVID-19
frailty
older patients
mortality rate
predictors of death

Access to Document

10.1093/eurpub/ckac108

Verduri_etal_PH_Comparison_between_first_VOR
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
Final published version, 403 KBLicence: CC BY-NC

Cite this

Verduri, A., Short, R., Carter, B., Braude, P., Vilches-Moraga, A., Quinn, T. J., Collins, J., Lumsden, J., McCarthy, K., Evans, L. A., Myint, P. K., Hewitt, J., & COPE Study Team (2022). Comparison between first and second wave of COVID-19 outbreak in older people: The COPE multicentre European observational cohort study. European Journal of Public Health, 32(5), 807–812. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac108

Verduri, A, Short, R, Carter, B, Braude, P, Vilches-Moraga, A, Quinn, TJ, Collins, J, Lumsden, J, McCarthy, K, Evans, LA, Myint, PK, Hewitt, J & COPE Study Team 2022, 'Comparison between first and second wave of COVID-19 outbreak in older people: The COPE multicentre European observational cohort study', European Journal of Public Health, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 807–812. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac108

@article{c0fd20fadb1a4148a76343e76d8d40c2,

title = "Comparison between first and second wave of COVID-19 outbreak in older people: The COPE multicentre European observational cohort study",

abstract = "Background: Effective shielding measures and virus mutations have progressively modified the disease between the waves, likewise health care systems have adapted to the outbreak.Our aim was to compare clinical outcomes for older people with COVID-19 in Wave 1 (W1) and 2 (W2).Methods: All data, including the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), were collected for COVID-19 consecutive patients, aged ≥65, from thirteen hospitals, in W1 (February-June 2020) and W2 (October 2020-March 2021). The primary outcome was mortality (time to mortality and 28-day mortality). Data were analysed with multilevel Cox proportional hazards, linear and logistic regression models, adjusted for wave baseline demographic and clinical characteristics.Results: Data from 611 people admitted in W2 were added to and compared with data collected during W1 (N=1340). Patients admitted in W2 were of similar age, median [IQR], W2= 79 [73-84]; W1=80 [74-86]; had a greater proportion of men (59.4% vs 53.0%); had lower 28-day mortality (29.1% vs 40.0%), compared to W1. For combined W1-W2 sample, W2 was independently associated with improved survival: time-to-mortality aHR= 0.78 (95%CI 0.65-0.93), 28-day mortality aOR=0.80 (95%CI 0.62-1.03). W2 was associated with increased length of hospital stay aHR=0.69 (95%CI 0.59-0.81). Patients in W2 were lessfrail, CFS (adjusted mean difference [aMD]=-0.50, 95%CI -0.81, -0.18), as well as presented with lower CRP (aMD=-22.52, 95%CI -32.00, -13.04).Conclusions: COVID-19 older adults in W2 were less likely to die than during W1. Patients presented to hospital during W2 were less frail and with lower disease severity and less likely to have renal decline. ",

keywords = "COVID-19, frailty, older patients, mortality rate, predictors of death",

author = "Alessia Verduri and Roxanna Short and Ben Carter and Philip Braude and Arturo Vilches-Moraga and Quinn, {Terence J} and Jemima Collins and Jane Lumsden and Kathryn McCarthy and Evans, {Louis A} and Myint, {Phyo Kyaw} and Jonathan Hewitt and {COPE Study Team}",

note = "Funding This study received no specific funding. The work was partially supported through the NIHR Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre at the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust in partnership with King's College London (BC). Acknowledgments Contributions of authors All authors contributed to the interpretation of results and in making an important intellectual contribution to the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. JH conceived the concept of the study. BC managed the project, AV did the literature review. BC and RS did data analysis and interpreted the findings and RS did statistical analysis and graphics. AV, BC, JH, RS wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript. JH is the guarantor of the study. ",

year = "2022",

month = oct,

doi = "10.1093/eurpub/ckac108",

language = "English",

volume = "32",

pages = "807–812",

journal = "European Journal of Public Health",

issn = "1101-1262",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison between first and second wave of COVID-19 outbreak in older people

T2 - The COPE multicentre European observational cohort study

AU - Verduri, Alessia

AU - Short, Roxanna

AU - Carter, Ben

AU - Braude, Philip

AU - Vilches-Moraga, Arturo

AU - Quinn, Terence J

AU - Collins, Jemima

AU - Lumsden, Jane

AU - McCarthy, Kathryn

AU - Evans, Louis A

AU - Myint, Phyo Kyaw

AU - Hewitt, Jonathan

AU - COPE Study Team

N1 - Funding This study received no specific funding. The work was partially supported through the NIHR Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre at the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust in partnership with King's College London (BC). Acknowledgments Contributions of authors All authors contributed to the interpretation of results and in making an important intellectual contribution to the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. JH conceived the concept of the study. BC managed the project, AV did the literature review. BC and RS did data analysis and interpreted the findings and RS did statistical analysis and graphics. AV, BC, JH, RS wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript. JH is the guarantor of the study.

PY - 2022/10

Y1 - 2022/10

N2 - Background: Effective shielding measures and virus mutations have progressively modified the disease between the waves, likewise health care systems have adapted to the outbreak.Our aim was to compare clinical outcomes for older people with COVID-19 in Wave 1 (W1) and 2 (W2).Methods: All data, including the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), were collected for COVID-19 consecutive patients, aged ≥65, from thirteen hospitals, in W1 (February-June 2020) and W2 (October 2020-March 2021). The primary outcome was mortality (time to mortality and 28-day mortality). Data were analysed with multilevel Cox proportional hazards, linear and logistic regression models, adjusted for wave baseline demographic and clinical characteristics.Results: Data from 611 people admitted in W2 were added to and compared with data collected during W1 (N=1340). Patients admitted in W2 were of similar age, median [IQR], W2= 79 [73-84]; W1=80 [74-86]; had a greater proportion of men (59.4% vs 53.0%); had lower 28-day mortality (29.1% vs 40.0%), compared to W1. For combined W1-W2 sample, W2 was independently associated with improved survival: time-to-mortality aHR= 0.78 (95%CI 0.65-0.93), 28-day mortality aOR=0.80 (95%CI 0.62-1.03). W2 was associated with increased length of hospital stay aHR=0.69 (95%CI 0.59-0.81). Patients in W2 were lessfrail, CFS (adjusted mean difference [aMD]=-0.50, 95%CI -0.81, -0.18), as well as presented with lower CRP (aMD=-22.52, 95%CI -32.00, -13.04).Conclusions: COVID-19 older adults in W2 were less likely to die than during W1. Patients presented to hospital during W2 were less frail and with lower disease severity and less likely to have renal decline.

AB - Background: Effective shielding measures and virus mutations have progressively modified the disease between the waves, likewise health care systems have adapted to the outbreak.Our aim was to compare clinical outcomes for older people with COVID-19 in Wave 1 (W1) and 2 (W2).Methods: All data, including the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), were collected for COVID-19 consecutive patients, aged ≥65, from thirteen hospitals, in W1 (February-June 2020) and W2 (October 2020-March 2021). The primary outcome was mortality (time to mortality and 28-day mortality). Data were analysed with multilevel Cox proportional hazards, linear and logistic regression models, adjusted for wave baseline demographic and clinical characteristics.Results: Data from 611 people admitted in W2 were added to and compared with data collected during W1 (N=1340). Patients admitted in W2 were of similar age, median [IQR], W2= 79 [73-84]; W1=80 [74-86]; had a greater proportion of men (59.4% vs 53.0%); had lower 28-day mortality (29.1% vs 40.0%), compared to W1. For combined W1-W2 sample, W2 was independently associated with improved survival: time-to-mortality aHR= 0.78 (95%CI 0.65-0.93), 28-day mortality aOR=0.80 (95%CI 0.62-1.03). W2 was associated with increased length of hospital stay aHR=0.69 (95%CI 0.59-0.81). Patients in W2 were lessfrail, CFS (adjusted mean difference [aMD]=-0.50, 95%CI -0.81, -0.18), as well as presented with lower CRP (aMD=-22.52, 95%CI -32.00, -13.04).Conclusions: COVID-19 older adults in W2 were less likely to die than during W1. Patients presented to hospital during W2 were less frail and with lower disease severity and less likely to have renal decline.

KW - COVID-19

KW - frailty

KW - older patients

KW - mortality rate

KW - predictors of death

U2 - 10.1093/eurpub/ckac108

DO - 10.1093/eurpub/ckac108

M3 - Article

SN - 1101-1262

VL - 32

SP - 807

EP - 812

JO - European Journal of Public Health

JF - European Journal of Public Health

IS - 5

ER -

Comparison between first and second wave of COVID-19 outbreak in older people: The COPE multicentre European observational cohort study

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Data Availability Statement

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this