Patients with schizophrenia (SCZ) represent a vulnerable population who have been understudied in COVID-19 research. We aimed to establish whether health outcomes and care differed between patients with SCZ and patients without a diagnosis of severe mental illness. We conducted a population-based cohort study of all patients with identified COVID-19 and respiratory symptoms who were hospitalized in France between February and June 2020. Cases were patients who had a diagnosis of SCZ. Controls were patients who did not have a diagnosis of severe mental illness. The outcomes were in-hospital mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. A total of 50 750 patients were included, of whom 823 were SCZ patients (1.6%). The SCZ patients had an increased in-hospital mortality (25.6% vs 21.7%; adjusted OR 1.30 [95% CI, 1.08–1.56], P = .0093) and a decreased ICU admission rate (23.7% vs 28.4%; adjusted OR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.62–0.91], P = .0062) compared with controls. Significant interactions between SCZ and age for mortality and ICU admission were observed (P = .0006 and P < .0001). SCZ patients between 65 and 80 years had a significantly higher risk of death than controls of the same age (+7.89%). SCZ patients younger than 55 years had more ICU admissions (+13.93%) and SCZ patients between 65 and 80 years and older than 80 years had less ICU admissions than controls of the same age (−15.44% and −5.93%, respectively). Our findings report the existence of disparities in health and health care between SCZ patients and patients without a diagnosis of severe mental illness. These disparities differed according to the age and clinical profile of SCZ patients, suggesting the importance of personalized COVID-19 clinical management and health care strategies before, during, and after hospitalization for reducing health disparities in this vulnerable population.

Background Patients with schizophrenia represent a vulnerable, underserved, and undertreated population who have been neglected in health disparities work. Understanding of end-of-life care in patients with schizophrenia and cancer is poor. We aimed to establish whether end-of-life care delivered to patients with schizophrenia and cancer differed from that delivered to patients with cancer who do not have diagnosed mental illness. Methods We did a population-based cohort study of all patients older than 15 years who had a diagnosis of advanced cancer and who died in hospital in France between Jan 1, 2013, and Dec 31, 2016. We divided this population into cases (ie, patients with schizophrenia) and controls (ie, patients without a diagnosis of mental illness) and compared access to palliative care and indicators of high-intensity end-of-life care between groups. In addition to unmatched analyses, we also did matched analyses (matched in terms of age at death, sex, and site of primary cancer) between patients with schizophrenia and matched controls (1:4). Multivariable generalised linear models were done with adjustment for social deprivation, year of death, time from cancer diagnosis to death, metastases, comorbidity, and hospital type (ie, specialist cancer centre vs non-specialist centre). Findings The main analysis included 2481 patients with schizophrenia and 222 477 controls. The matched analyses included 2477 patients with schizophrenia and 9896 controls. Patients with schizophrenia were more likely to receive palliative care in the last 31 days of life (adjusted odds ratio 1•61 [95% CI 1•45-1•80]; p<0•0001) and less likely to receive high-intensity end-of-life care-such as chemotherapy and surgery-than were matched controls without a diagnosis of mental illness. Patients with schizophrenia were also more likely to die younger, had a shorter duration between cancer diagnosis and death, and were more likely to have thoracic cancers and comorbidities than were controls. Interpretation Our findings suggest the existence of disparities in health and health care between patients with schizophrenia and patients without a diagnosis of mental illness. These findings underscore the need for better understanding of health inequalities so that effective interventions can be developed for this vulnerable population.

Background There is limited information describing the presenting characteristics and outcomes of patients with schizophrenia (SCZ) requiring hospitalization for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Aims We aimed to compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 SCZ patients with those of non-SCZ patients. Method This was a case-control study of COVID-19 patients admitted to 4 AP–HM/AMU acute care hospitals in Marseille, southern France. COVID-19 infection was confirmed by a positive result on polymerase chain reaction testing of a nasopharyngeal sample and/or on chest computed scan among patients requiring hospital admission. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcome was intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Results A total of 1092 patients were included. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 9.0%. The SCZ patients had an increased mortality compared to the non-SCZ patients (26.7% vs. 8.7%, P = 0.039), which was confirmed by the multivariable analysis after adjustment for age, sex, smoking status, obesity and comorbidity (adjusted odds ratio 4.36 [95% CI: 1.09–17.44]; P = 0.038). In contrast, the SCZ patients were not more frequently admitted to the ICU than the non-SCZ patients. Importantly, the SCZ patients were mostly institutionalized (63.6%, 100% of those who died), and they were more likely to have cancers and respiratory comorbidities. Conclusions This study suggests that SCZ is not overrepresented among COVID-19 hospitalized patients, but SCZ is associated with excess COVID-19 mortality, confirming the existence of health disparities described in other somatic diseases.

Background Efforts to improve the quality of end‐of‐life (EOL) care depend on better knowledge of the care that children, adolescents, and young adults with cancer receive, including high‐intensity EOL (HI‐EOL) care. The objective was to assess the rates of HI‐EOL care in this population and to determine patient‐ and hospital‐related predictors of HI‐EOL from the French national hospital database. Methods This was a population‐based, retrospective study of a cohort of patients aged 0 to 25 years at the time of death who died at hospital as a result of cancer in France between 2014 and 2016. The primary outcome was HI‐EOL care, defined as the occurrence of ≥1 chemotherapy session <14 days from death, receiving care in an intensive care unit ≥1 time, >1 emergency room admission, and >1 hospitalization in an acute care unit in the last 30 days of life. Results The study included 1899 individuals from 345 hospitals; 61.4% experienced HI‐EOL care. HI‐EOL was increased with social disadvantage (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03‐1.65; P = .028), hematological malignancies (AOR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.57‐2.77; P < .001), complex chronic conditions (AOR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.23‐2.09; P = .001) and care delivered in a specialty center (AOR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.22‐2.36; P = .001). HI‐EOL was reduced in cases of palliative care (AOR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.24‐0.41; P < .001). Conclusion A majority of children, adolescents, and young adults experience HI‐EOL care. Several features (eg, social disadvantage, cancer diagnosis, complex chronic conditions, and specialty center care) were associated with HI‐EOL care. These findings should now be discussed with patients, families, and professionals to define the optimal EOL.

The objective of the study was to determine which psychoactive prescription drugs are illegally obtained and through which ways of acquisition. OPPIDUM is an annual national study. It is based on specialized care centers that included subjects presenting a drug dependency or under opiate maintenance treatment. All their psychoactive substances consumed are reported. This work focuses on the different ways of acquisition specially the illegal ways of acquisition (bought on the street, forged prescription, stolen, given, internet). For each medication illegally obtained, a ratio has been calculated (number of illegal acquisitions divided by the number of described acquisitions). In 2008, 5542 subjects have been included and have described the consumption of 11 027 substances including 63.8% of prescription drugs. Among them, 11% were illegally obtained. The different illegal acquisition ways were 'street market' (77.6%), 'gift' (16.6%), 'theft' (2.3%), 'forged prescription' (2.3%), and 'internet' (0.7%). The third first drugs illegally obtained were high dosage buprenorphine, methadone, and clonazepam. Some prescription drugs, less consumed, have an important ratio of illegal acquisition like ketamine, flunitrazepam, morphine, trihexyphenidyl, or methylphenidate. This study confirms that theft, forged prescription and internet are few used and permits to highlight diversion of prescription drugs. It is important to inform healthcare professionals on the different prescription drugs that are illegally obtained.