Background: There has been much interest in environmental temperature and race as modulators of Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) infection and mortality. However, in the United States race and temperature correlate with various other social determinants of health, comorbidities, and environmental influences that could be responsible for noted effects. This study investigates the independent effects of race and environmental temperature on COVID-19 incidence and mortality in United States counties. Methods: Data on COVID-19 and risk factors in all United States counties was collected. 661 counties with at least 50 COVID-19 cases and 217 with at least 10 deaths were included in analyses. Upper and lower quartiles for cases/100,000 people and halves for deaths/100,000 people were compared with t-tests. Adjusted linear and logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the independent effects of race and environmental temperature. Results: Multivariate regression analyses demonstrated Black race is a risk factor for increased COVID-19 cases (OR=1.22, 95% CI: 1.09−1.40, P=0.001) and deaths independent of comorbidities, poverty, access to health care, and other risk factors. Higher environmental temperature independently reduced caseload (OR=0.81, 95% CI: 0.71−0.91, P=0.0009), but not deaths. Conclusions: Higher environmental temperatures correlated with reduced COVID-19 cases, but this benefit does not yet appear in mortality models. Black race was an independent risk factor for increased COVID-19 cases and deaths. Thus, many proposed mechanisms through which Black race might increase risk for COVID-19, such as socioeconomic and healthcare-related predispositions, are inadequate in explaining the full magnitude of this health disparity.
Background: Policymakers have employed various non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs)such as stay-at-home orders and school closures to limit the spread of Coronavirus disease . However, these measures are not without cost, and careful analysis is critical to quantify their impact on disease spread and guide future initiatives. This study aims to measure the impact of NPIs on the effective reproductive number (Rt) and other COVID-19 outcomes in U.S. states. Methods:In order to standardize the stage of disease spread in each state, this study analyzes the weeks immediately after each state reached 500 cases. The primary outcomes were average Rt in the week following 500 cases and doubling time from 500 to 1000 cases. Linear and logistic regressions were performed in R to assess the impact of various NPIs while controlling for population density, GDP, and certain health metrics. This analysis was repeated for deaths with doubling time from 50 to 100 deaths and included several healthcare infrastructure control variables. Results:States that had a stay-at-home order in place at the time of their 500th case are associated with lower average Rt the following week compared to states without a stay-at-home order (p < 0.001) and are significantly less likely to have an Rt>1 (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.37, p = 0.004). These states also experienced a significantly longer doubling time from 500 to 1000 cases (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.72, p = 0.004). States in the highest quartile of average time spent at home were also slower to reach 1000 cases than those in the lowest quartile (HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.53, p = 0.002).Discussion: Few studies have analyzed the effect of statewide stay-at-home orders, school closures, and other social distancing measures in the U.S., which has faced the largest COVID-19 case burden. States with stay-at-home orders have a 93% decrease in the odds of having a positive Rt at a standardized point in disease burden. States that plan to scale back such measures should carefully monitor transmission metrics.
Background: Various non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as stay-at-home orders and school closures have been employed to limit the spread of Coronavirus disease . This study measures the impact of social distancing policies on COVID-19 transmission in US states during the early outbreak phase to assess which policies were most effective. Methods:To measure transmissibility, we analyze the average effective reproductive number (R t ) in each state the week following its 500th case and doubling time from 500 to 1000 cases. Linear and logistic regressions were performed to assess the impact of various NPIs while controlling for population density, GDP, and certain health metrics. This analysis was repeated for deaths with doubling time to 100 deaths with several healthcare infrastructure control variables.Results: States with stay-at-home orders in place at the time of their 500th case were associated with lower average R t the following week compared to states without them (p<0.001) and significantly less likely to have an R t >1 (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01−0.37, p = 0.004). These states also experienced longer doubling time from 500 to 1000 cases (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.17 −0.72, p = 0.004). States in the highest quartile of average time spent at home were also slower to reach 1000 cases than those in the lowest quartile (HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.06−0.53, p = 0.002).Conclusions: Stay-at-home orders had the largest effect of any policy analyzed. Multivariate analyses with cellphone tracking data suggest social distancing adherence drives these effects. States that plan to scale back such measures should carefully monitor transmission metrics.
Background Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) remains the deadliest form of stroke worldwide, inducing neuronal death through a wide variety of pathways. Therapeutic hypothermia (TH) is a robust and well studied neuroprotectant widely used across a variety of specialties. Aims This review summarizes results from preclinical and clinical studies to highlight the overall effectiveness of TH to improve long-term ICH outcomes while also elucidating optimal protocol regimens to maximize therapeutic effect. Summary of Review A systematic review was conducted across three databases to identify trials investigating the use of TH to treat ICH. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted on preclinical studies, looking at neurobehavioral outcomes, blood brain barrier breakdown (BBB), cerebral edema, hematoma volume, and tissue loss. Several mixed-methods meta-regression models were also performed to adjust for variance and variations in hypothermia induction procedures. 21 preclinical studies and 5 human studies were identified. The meta-analysis of preclinical studies demonstrated a significant benefit in behavioral scores (ES=-0.43, p=0.02), cerebral edema (ES=1.32, p=0.0001), and BBB (ES=2.73, p=<0.00001). TH was not found to significantly affect hematoma expansion (ES=-0.24, p=0.12) or tissue loss (ES=0.06, p=0.68). Clinical study outcome reporting was heterogeneous, however there was recurring evidence of TH-induced edema reduction. Conclusions The combined preclinical evidence demonstrates that TH reduced multiple cell death mechanisms initiated by ICH, yet there is no definitive evidence in clinical studies. The cooling strategies employed in both preclinical and clinical studies were highly diverse, and focused refinement of cooling protocols should be developed in future preclinical studies. The current data for TH in ICH remains questionable despite the highly promising indications in preclinical studies. Definitive randomized controlled studies are still required to answer this therapeutic question.
Objectives : Coronavirus disease-19 has spread rapidly around the world, and many risk factors including patient demographics, social determinants of health, environmental variables, underlying health conditions, and adherence to social distancing have been hypothesized to affect case and death rates. However, little has been done to account for the potential confounding effects of these factors. Using a large multivariate analysis, this study illuminates modulators of COVID-19 incidence and mortality in U.S. counties while controlling for risk factors across multiple domains.Methods : Data on COVID-19 and various risk factors in all U.S. counties was collected from publicly available data sources through April 14, 2020. Counties with at least 50 COVID-19 cases were included in case analyses and those with at least 10 deaths were included in mortality models. The 661 counties meeting inclusion criteria for number of cases were grouped into quartiles and comparisons of risk factors were made using t-tests between the highest and lowest quartiles. Similar comparisons for 217 counties were made for above average and below average deaths/100,000. Adjusted linear and logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the independent effects of factors that significantly impacted cases and deaths.Results : Univariate analyses demonstrated numerous significant differences between cohorts for both cases and deaths. Risk factors associated with increased cases and/or deaths per 100,000 included increased GDP per capita, decreased social distancing, increased age, increased percent Black, decreased percent Hispanic, decreased percent Asian, decreased health, increased poverty, increased diabetes, increased coronary heart disease, increased physical inactivity, increased alcohol consumption, increased tobacco use, and decreased access to primary care. Multivariate regression analyses demonstrated Black race is a risk factor for worse COVID-19 outcome independent of comorbidities, poverty, access to health care, and other mitigating factors. Lower daily temperatures was also an independent risk factor in case load but not deaths.Conclusions : U.S. counties with a higher proportion of Black residents are associated with increased COVID-19 cases and deaths. However, the various suggested mechanisms, such as socioeconomic and healthcare predispositions, did not appear to drive the effect of race in our model. Counties with higher average daily temperatures are also associated with decreased COVID-19 cases but not deaths. Several theories are posited to explain these findings, including prevalence of vitamin D deficiency. Additional studies are needed to further understand these effects.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.