Frank Trübner1, Lisa Steigert1, Fabian Echterdiek2, Norma Jung3, Kirsten Schmidt-Hellerau3, Wolfram G Zoller1, Julia-Stefanie Frick4, You-Shan Feng5, Gregor Paul1,3,6. 1. Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Pneumology and Infectious diseases, Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany. 2. Department of Nephrology, Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany. 3. Division of Infectious Diseases, Department I of Internal Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. 4. Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. 5. Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Applied Biometry, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. 6. Department of Hospital Hygiene, Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to identify clinical risk factors for COVID-19 in a German outpatient fever clinic that allow distinction of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients from other patients with flu-like symptoms. METHODS: This is a retrospective, single-centre cohort study. Patients were included visiting the fever clinic from 4th of April 2020 to 15th of May 2020. Symptoms, comorbidities, and socio-demographic factors were recorded in a standardized fashion. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify risk factors of COVID-19, on the bases of those a model discrimination was assessed using area under the receiver operation curves (AUROC). RESULTS: The final analysis included 930 patients, of which 74 (8%) had COVID-19. Anosmia (OR 10.71; CI 6.07-18.9) and ageusia (OR 9.3; CI 5.36-16.12) were strongly associated with COVID-19. High-risk exposure (OR 12.20; CI 6.80-21.90), especially in the same household (OR 4.14; CI 1.28-13.33), was also correlated; the more household members, especially with flu-like symptoms, the higher the risk of COVID-19. Working in an essential workplace was also associated with COVID-19 (OR 2.35; CI 1.40-3.96), whereas smoking was inversely correlated (OR 0.19; CI 0.08-0.44). A model that considered risk factors like anosmia, ageusia, concomitant of symptomatic household members and smoking well discriminated COVID-19 patients from other patients with flu-like symptoms (AUROC 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: We report a set of four readily available clinical parameters that allow the identification of high-risk individuals of COVID-19. Our study will not replace molecular testing but will help guide containment efforts while waiting for test results.
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to identify clinical risk factors for COVID-19 in a German outpatientfever clinic that allow distinction of SARS-CoV-2 infectedpatients from other patients with flu-like symptoms. METHODS: This is a retrospective, single-centre cohort study. Patients were included visiting the fever clinic from 4th of April 2020 to 15th of May 2020. Symptoms, comorbidities, and socio-demographic factors were recorded in a standardized fashion. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify risk factors of COVID-19, on the bases of those a model discrimination was assessed using area under the receiver operation curves (AUROC). RESULTS: The final analysis included 930 patients, of which 74 (8%) had COVID-19. Anosmia (OR 10.71; CI 6.07-18.9) and ageusia (OR 9.3; CI 5.36-16.12) were strongly associated with COVID-19. High-risk exposure (OR 12.20; CI 6.80-21.90), especially in the same household (OR 4.14; CI 1.28-13.33), was also correlated; the more household members, especially with flu-like symptoms, the higher the risk of COVID-19. Working in an essential workplace was also associated with COVID-19 (OR 2.35; CI 1.40-3.96), whereas smoking was inversely correlated (OR 0.19; CI 0.08-0.44). A model that considered risk factors like anosmia, ageusia, concomitant of symptomatic household members and smoking well discriminated COVID-19patients from other patients with flu-like symptoms (AUROC 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: We report a set of four readily available clinical parameters that allow the identification of high-risk individuals of COVID-19. Our study will not replace molecular testing but will help guide containment efforts while waiting for test results.
Authors: Giuseppe Mancia; Federico Rea; Monica Ludergnani; Giovanni Apolone; Giovanni Corrao Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2020-05-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ann-Sofie Rudberg; Sebastian Havervall; Anna Månberg; August Jernbom Falk; Katherina Aguilera; Henry Ng; Lena Gabrielsson; Ann-Christin Salomonsson; Leo Hanke; Ben Murrell; Gerald McInerney; Jennie Olofsson; Eni Andersson; Cecilia Hellström; Shaghayegh Bayati; Sofia Bergström; Elisa Pin; Ronald Sjöberg; Hanna Tegel; My Hedhammar; Mia Phillipson; Peter Nilsson; Sophia Hober; Charlotte Thålin Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2020-10-08 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Aaron Leong; Joanne B Cole; Laura N Brenner; James B Meigs; Jose C Florez; Josep M Mercader Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2021-03-04 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Cristina Menni; Ana M Valdes; Claire J Steves; Tim D Spector; Maxim B Freidin; Carole H Sudre; Long H Nguyen; David A Drew; Sajaysurya Ganesh; Thomas Varsavsky; M Jorge Cardoso; Julia S El-Sayed Moustafa; Alessia Visconti; Pirro Hysi; Ruth C E Bowyer; Massimo Mangino; Mario Falchi; Jonathan Wolf; Sebastien Ourselin; Andrew T Chan Journal: Nat Med Date: 2020-05-11 Impact factor: 53.440