RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 COVID Oximetry @home: evaluation of patient outcomes
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.05.29.21257899
DO 10.1101/2021.05.29.21257899
A1 Boniface, Michael
A1 Burns, Daniel
A1 Duckworth, Chris
A1 Ahmed, Mazen
A1 Duruiheoma, Franklin
A1 Armitage, Htwe
A1 Ratcliffe, Naomi
A1 Duffy, John
A1 O’Keeffe, Caroline
A1 Inada-Kim, Matt
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/19/2021.05.29.21257899.abstract
AB Background COVID-19 has placed unprecedented demands on hospitals. A clinical service, COVID Oximetry @home (CO@h) was launched in November 2020 to support remote monitoring of COVID-19 patients in the community. Remote monitoring through CO@h aims to identify early patient deterioration and provide timely escalation for cases of silent hypoxia, while reducing the burden on secondary care.Methods We conducted a retrospective service evaluation of COVID-19 patients onboarded to CO@h from November 2020 to March 2021 in the North Hampshire (UK) community led service (a collaboration of 15 GP practices covering 230,000 people). We have compared outcomes for patients admitted to Basingstoke & North Hampshire Hospital who were CO@h patients (COVID-19 patients with home monitoring of SpO2 (n=115)), with non-CO@h patients (those directly admitted without being monitored by CO@h (n=633)). Crude and adjusted odds ratio analysis was performed to evaluate the effects of CO@h on patient outcomes of 30-day mortality, ICU admission and hospital length of stay greater than 3, 7, 14, and 28 days.Results Adjusted odds ratios for CO@h show an association with a reduction for several adverse patient outcome: 30-day hospital mortality (p<0.001 OR 0.21 95% CI 0.08-0.47), hospital length of stay larger than 3 days (p<0.05, OR 0.62 95% CI 0.39-1.00), 7 days (p<0.001 OR 0.35 95% CI 0.22-0.54), 14 days (p<0.001 OR 0.22 95% CI 0.11-0.41), and 28 days (p<0.05 OR 0.21 95% CI 0.05-0.59). No significant reduction ICU admission was observed (p>0.05 OR 0.43 95% CI 0.15-1.04). Within 30 days of hospital admission, there were no hospital readmissions for those on the CO@h service as opposed to 8.7% readmissions for those not on the service.Conclusions We have demonstrated a significant association between CO@h and better patient outcomes; most notably a reduction in the odds of hospital lengths of stays longer than 7, 14 and 28 days and 30-day hospital mortality.Competing Interest StatementM. I-K. is National Clinical Lead Deterioration & National Specialist Advisor Sepsis, NHS England and NHS Improvement. All other authors declare no competing interests.Funding StatementThis report received funding from the NHSX RECOxCARE (Remote oximetry in community care for COVID-19 patients) project and from NHS England to support data collection.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This service evaluation did not require ethics approval. The study was however evaluated by the University of Southampton Ethics Committee (REF ERGO/61242) and approved as a service evaluation following Data Protection Impact Assessment and establishment of Data Sharing Agreements. NHS England and NHS Improvement have been given legal notice by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to support the processing and sharing of information to help the COVID-19 response under Health Service Control of Patient Information Regulations 2002 (COPI). This is to ensure that confidential patient information can be used and shared appropriately and lawfully for purposes related to the COVID-19 response. Data were extracted from medical records by clinicians providing care for the patients and an anonymised extract of the data were provided to the team at the University of Southampton.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesDue to information governance concerns, the data will not be made public. However, it may be made accessible via reasonable request to the corresponding author.