No abstract

Background The interaction between COVID-19, non-communicable diseases, and chronic infectious diseases such as HIV and tuberculosis is unclear, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries in Africa. South Africa has a national HIV prevalence of 19% among people aged 15-49 years and a tuberculosis prevalence of 0•7% in people of all ages. Using a nationally representative hospital surveillance system in South Africa, we aimed to investigate the factors associated with in-hospital mortality among patients with COVID-19. MethodsIn this cohort study, we used data submitted to DATCOV, a national active hospital surveillance system for COVID-19 hospital admissions, for patients admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March 5, 2020, and March 27, 2021. Age, sex, race or ethnicity, and comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes, chronic cardiac disease, chronic pulmonary disease and asthma, chronic renal disease, malignancy in the past 5 years, HIV, and past and current tuberculosis) were considered as risk factors for COVID-19-related in-hospital mortality. COVID-19 in-hospital mortality, the main outcome, was defined as a death related to COVID-19 that occurred during the hospital stay and excluded deaths that occurred because of other causes or after discharge from hospital; therefore, only patients with a known in-hospital outcome (died or discharged alive) were included. Chained equation multiple imputation was used to account for missing data and random-effects multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the role of HIV status and underlying comorbidities on COVID-19 in-hospital mortality. FindingsAmong the 219 265 individuals admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and known in-hospital outcome data, 51 037 (23•3%) died. Most commonly observed comorbidities among individuals with available data were hypertension in 61 098 (37•4%) of 163 350, diabetes in 43 885 (27•4%) of 159 932, and HIV in 13 793 (9•1%) of 151 779. Tuberculosis was reported in 5282 (3•6%) of 146 381 individuals. Increasing age was the strongest predictor of COVID-19 in-hospital mortality. Other factors associated were HIV infection (adjusted odds ratio 1•34, 95% CI 1•27-1•43), past tuberculosis (1•26, 1•15-1•38), current tuberculosis (1•42, 1•22-1•64), and both past and current tuberculosis (1•48, 1•32-1•67) compared with never tuberculosis, as well as other described risk factors for COVID-19, such as male sex; non-White race; underlying hypertension, diabetes, chronic cardiac disease, chronic renal disease, and malignancy in the past 5 years; and treatment in the public health sector. After adjusting for other factors, people with HIV not on antiretroviral therapy (ART; adjusted odds ratio 1•45, 95% CI 1•22-1•72) were more likely to die in hospital than were people with HIV on ART. Among people with HIV, the prevalence of other comorbidities was 29•2% compared with 30•8% among HIV-uninfected individuals. Increasing number of comorbidities was associated with...

Background The first wave of COVID-19 in South Africa peaked in July, 2020, and a larger second wave peaked in January, 2021, in which the SARS-CoV-2 501Y.V2 (Beta) lineage predominated. We aimed to compare in-hospital mortality and other patient characteristics between the first and second waves.Methods In this prospective cohort study, we analysed data from the DATCOV national active surveillance system for COVID-19 admissions to hospital from March 5, 2020, to March 27, 2021. The system contained data from all hospitals in South Africa that have admitted a patient with COVID-19. We used incidence risk for admission to hospital and determined cutoff dates to define five wave periods: pre-wave 1, wave 1, post-wave 1, wave 2, and post-wave 2. We compared the characteristics of patients with COVID-19 who were admitted to hospital in wave 1 and wave 2, and risk factors for in-hospital mortality accounting for wave period using random-effect multivariable logistic regression.Findings Peak rates of COVID-19 cases, admissions, and in-hospital deaths in the second wave exceeded rates in the first wave: COVID-19 cases, 240•4 cases per 100 000 people vs 136•0 cases per 100 000 people; admissions, 27•9 admissions per 100 000 people vs 16•1 admissions per 100 000 people; deaths, 8•3 deaths per 100 000 people vs 3•6 deaths per 100 000 people. The weekly average growth rate in hospital admissions was 20% in wave 1 and 43% in wave 2 (ratio of growth rate in wave 2 compared with wave 1 was 1•19, 95% CI 1•18-1•20). Compared with the first wave, individuals admitted to hospital in the second wave were more likely to be age 40-64 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1•22, 95% CI 1•14-1•31), and older than 65 years (aOR 1•38, 1•25-1•52), compared with younger than 40 years; of Mixed race (aOR 1•21, 1•06-1•38) compared with White race; and admitted in the public sector (aOR 1•65, 1•41-1•92); and less likely to be Black (aOR 0•53, 0•47-0•60) and Indian (aOR 0•77, 0•66-0•91), compared with White; and have a comorbid condition (aOR 0•60, 0•55-0•67).For multivariable analysis, after adjusting for weekly COVID-19 hospital admissions, there was a 31% increased risk of in-hospital mortality in the second wave (aOR 1•31, 95% CI 1•28-1•35). In-hospital case-fatality risk increased from 17•7% in weeks of low admission (<3500 admissions) to 26•9% in weeks of very high admission (>8000 admissions; aOR 1•24, 1•17-1•32).Interpretation In South Africa, the second wave was associated with higher incidence of COVID-19, more rapid increase in admissions to hospital, and increased in-hospital mortality. Although some of the increased mortality can be explained by admissions in the second wave being more likely in older individuals, in the public sector, and by the increased health system pressure, a residual increase in mortality of patients admitted to hospital could be related to the new Beta lineage.

BackgroundDrug-resistant tuberculosis (TB), especially multidrug-resistant (MDR, resistance to rifampicin and isoniazid) disease, is associated with a worse patient outcome. Drug resistance diagnosed using microbiological culture takes days to weeks, as TB bacteria grow slowly. Rapid molecular tests for drug resistance detection (1 day) are commercially available and may promote faster initiation of appropriate treatment.ObjectivesTo (1) conduct a systematic review of evidence regarding diagnostic accuracy of molecular genetic tests for drug resistance, (2) conduct a health-economic evaluation of screening and diagnostic strategies, including comparison of alternative models of service provision and assessment of the value of targeting rapid testing at high-risk subgroups, and (3) construct a transmission-dynamic mathematical model that translates the estimates of diagnostic accuracy into estimates of clinical impact.Review methods and data sourcesA standardised search strategy identified relevant studies from EMBASE, PubMed, MEDLINE, Bioscience Information Service (BIOSIS), System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe Social Policy & Practice (SIGLE) and Web of Science, published between 1 January 2000 and 15 August 2013. Additional ‘grey’ sources were included. Quality was assessed using quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies version 2 (QUADAS-2). For each diagnostic strategy and population subgroup, a care pathway was constructed to specify which medical treatments and health services that individuals would receive from presentation to the point where they either did or did not complete TB treatment successfully. A total cost was estimated from a health service perspective for each care pathway, and the health impact was estimated in terms of the mean discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) lost as a result of disease and treatment. Costs and QALYs were both discounted at 3.5% per year. An integrated transmission-dynamic and economic model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of introducing rapid molecular testing (in addition to culture and drug sensitivity testing). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the impact on cost-effectiveness of diagnostic and treatment time delays, diagnosis and treatment costs, and associated QALYs.ResultsA total of 8922 titles and abstracts were identified, with 557 papers being potentially eligible. Of these, 56 studies contained sufficient test information for analysis. All three commercial tests performed well when detecting drug resistance in clinical samples, although with evidence of heterogeneity between studies. Pooled sensitivity for GenoType®MTBDRplus (Hain Lifescience, Nehren, Germany) (isoniazid and rifampicin resistance), INNO-LiPA Rif.TB®(Fujirebio Europe, Ghent, Belgium) (rifampicin resistance) and Xpert®MTB/RIF (Cepheid Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA) (rifampicin resistance) was 83.4%, 94.6%, 95.4% and 96.8%, respectively; equivalent pooled specificity was 99.6%, 98.2%, 99.7% and 98.4%, respectively. Results of the transmission model suggest that all of the rapid assays considered here, if added to the current diagnostic pathway, would be cost-saving and achieve a reduction in expected QALY loss compared with current practice. GenoType MTBDRplus appeared to be the most cost-effective of the rapid tests in the South Asian population, although results were similar for GeneXpert. In all other scenarios GeneXpert appeared to be the most cost-effective strategy.ConclusionsRapid molecular tests for rifampicin and isoniazid resistance were sensitive and specific. They may also be cost-effective when added to culture drug susceptibility testing in the UK. There is global interest in point-of-care testing and further work is needed to review the performance of emerging tests and the wider health-economic impact of decentralised testing in clinics and primary care, as well as non-health-care settings, such as shelters and prisons.Study registrationThis study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42011001537.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.