Rationale: Black race and Hispanic ethnicity are associated with increased risks for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) infection and severity. It is purported that socioeconomic factors may drive this association, but data supporting this assertion are sparse. Objectives: To evaluate whether socioeconomic factors mediate the association of race/ethnicity with COVID-19 incidence and outcomes. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults tested for (cohort 1) or hospitalized with (cohort 2) COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and July 23, 2020, at the University of Miami Hospital and Clinics. Our primary exposure was race/ethnicity. We considered socioeconomic factors as potential mediators of our exposure’s association with outcomes. We used standard statistics to describe our cohorts and multivariable regression modeling to identify associations of race/ethnicity with our primary outcomes, one for each cohort, of test positivity (cohort 1) and hospital mortality (cohort 2). We performed a mediation analysis to see whether household income, population density, and household size mediated the association of race/ethnicity with outcomes. Results: Our cohorts included 15,473 patients tested (29.0% non-Hispanic White, 48.1% Hispanic White, 15.0% non-Hispanic Black, 1.7% Hispanic Black, and 1.6% other) and 295 patients hospitalized (9.2% non-Hispanic White, 56.9% Hispanic White, 21.4% non-Hispanic Black, 2.4% Hispanic Black, and 10.2% other). Among those tested, 1,256 patients (8.1%) tested positive, and, of the hospitalized patients, 47 (15.9%) died. After adjustment for demographics, race/ethnicity was associated with test positivity—odds-ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) versus non-Hispanic White for Non-Hispanic Black: 3.21 (2.60–3.96), Hispanic White: 2.72 (2.28–3.26), and Hispanic Black: 3.55 (2.33–5.28). Population density mediated this association (percentage mediated, 17%; 95% CI, 11–31%), as did median income (27%; 95% CI, 18–52%) and household size (20%; 95% CI, 12–45%). There was no association between race/ethnicity and mortality, although this analysis was underpowered. Conclusions: Black race and Hispanic ethnicity are associated with an increased odds of COVID-19 positivity. This association is substantially mediated by socioeconomic factors.

Hospital-acquired infections are emerging major concurrent conditions during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. We conducted a retrospective review of hospitalizations during March‒October 2020 of adults tested by reverse transcription PCR for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. We evaluated associations of COVID-19 diagnosis with risk for laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infections (LCBIs, primary outcome), time to LCBI, and risk for death by using logistic and competing risks regression with adjustment for relevant covariates. A total of 10,848 patients were included in the analysis: 918 (8.5%) were given a diagnosis of COVID-19, and 232 (2.1%) had LCBIs during their hospitalization. Of these patients, 58 (25%) were classified as having central line‒associated bloodstream infections. After adjusting for covariates, COVID-19‒positive status was associated with higher risk for LCBI and death. Reinforcement of infection control practices should be implemented in COVID-19 wards, and review of superiority and inferiority ranking methods by National Healthcare Safety Network criteria might be needed.

Background To assess the effectiveness of messenger RNA vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) in preventing emergency department (ED) presentations for acute respiratory illness. Basic procedures We conducted a retrospective study assessing adult presentations (age ≥ 18) to the University of Miami Hospital's ED from January 1st through August 25th, 2021, with a SARS-COV-2 PCR test and acute respiratory infection symptoms. Vaccine effectiveness was calculated using a test-negative design. Both univariable and multivariable (adjusted for age, gender, race, insurance status, imputed body mass index [BMI], vaccine type, week of presentation) regression analyses were conducted for the full cohort and subgroups. Main findings The cohort consisted of 13,203 ED presentations—3134 (23.7%) fully vaccinated and SARS-COV-2 negative, 108 (0.8%) fully vaccinated and SARS-COV-2 positive, 8817 (66.8%) unvaccinated and SARS-COV-2 negative, and 1144 (8.7%) unvaccinated and SARS-COV-2 positive. Unadjusted vaccination effectiveness was 73.4% (95% confidence interval: 67.5%,78.3%) and, after adjustment, 73.8% (66.2%,79.7%). The Moderna vaccine's effectiveness was numerically higher (unadjusted: 78.2% [68.8%, 84.7%]; adjusted: 78.0% [68.1%, 84.9%]) than the Pfizer vaccine's (unadjusted: 70.8% [62.9%, 76.9%]; adjusted: 73.9% [66.3%,79.8%]). We found a significant difference in adjusted vaccine effectiveness across categories was BMI ( p < 0.001)—BMI <25: 66.3% (45.3%,79.2%); BMI 25–29: 71.3% (56.1%, 81.2%); BMI 30–34: 84.5% (71.7%, 91.5%); and BMI ≥35: 72.7% (50.5%, 84.9%). Principal conclusions We demonstrated excellent real-world effectiveness of mRNA vaccines in preventing ED presentation for SARS-COV-2 in a diverse U.S. cohort. Notably, vaccine effectiveness improved with increasing BMI (until class 2 obesity).

Rationale Sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores are commonly used in crisis standards of care policies to assist in resource allocation. The relative predictive value of SOFA by coronavirus disease (COVID-19) infection status and among racial and ethnic subgroups within patients infected with COVID-19 is unknown. Objectives To evaluate the accuracy and calibration of SOFA in predicting hospital mortality by COVID-19 infection status and across racial and ethnic subgroups. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult admissions to the University of Miami Hospital and Clinics inpatient wards (July 1, 2020–April 1, 2021). We primarily considered maximum SOFA within 48 hours of hospitalization. We assessed accuracy using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and created calibration belts. Considered subgroups were defined by COVID-19 infection status (by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 polymerase chain reaction testing) and prevalent racial and ethnic minorities. Comparisons across subgroups were made with DeLong testing for discriminative accuracy and visualization of calibration belts. Results Our primary cohort consisted of 20,045 hospitalizations, of which 1,894 (9.5%) were COVID-19 positive. SOFA was similarly accurate for COVID-19–positive (AUROC, 0.835) and COVID-19–negative (AUROC, 0.810; P = 0.15) admissions but was slightly better calibrated in patients who were positive for COVID-19. For those with critical illness, maximum SOFA score accuracy at critical illness onset also did not differ by COVID-19 status (AUROC, COVID-19 positive vs. negative: intensive care unit admissions, 0.751 vs. 0.775; P = 0.46; mechanically ventilated, 0.713 vs. 0.792, P = 0.13), and calibration was again better for patients positive for COVID-19. Among patients with COVID-19, SOFA accuracy was similar between the non-Hispanic White population (AUROC, 0.894) and racial and ethnic minorities (Hispanic White population: AUROC, 0.824 [ P vs. non-Hispanic White = 0.05]; non-Hispanic Black population: AUROC, 0.800 [ P = 0.12]; Hispanic Black population: AUROC, 0.948 [ P = 0.31]). This similar accuracy was also found for those without COVID-19 (non-Hispanic White population: AUROC, 0.829; Hispanic White population: AUROC, 0.811 [ P = 0.37]; Hispanic Black population: AUROC, 0.828 [ P = 0.97]; non-Hispanic Black population: AUROC, 0.867 [ P = 0.46]). SOFA was well calibrated for all racial and ethnic groups with COVID-19 but estimated mortality more variably and performed less well across races and ethnicities without COVID-19. Conclusions SOFA accuracy does not differ by COVID-19 status and is sim...

No abstract