Background The ISARIC prospective multinational observational study is the largest cohort of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We present relationships of age, sex, and nationality to presenting symptoms. Methods International, prospective observational study of 60 109 hospitalized symptomatic patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 recruited from 43 countries between 30 January and 3 August 2020. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate relationships of age and sex to published COVID-19 case definitions and the most commonly reported symptoms. Results ‘Typical’ symptoms of fever (69%), cough (68%) and shortness of breath (66%) were the most commonly reported. 92% of patients experienced at least one of these. Prevalence of typical symptoms was greatest in 30- to 60-year-olds (respectively 80, 79, 69%; at least one 95%). They were reported less frequently in children (≤ 18 years: 69, 48, 23; 85%), older adults (≥ 70 years: 61, 62, 65; 90%), and women (66, 66, 64; 90%; vs. men 71, 70, 67; 93%, each P < 0.001). The most common atypical presentations under 60 years of age were nausea and vomiting and abdominal pain, and over 60 years was confusion. Regression models showed significant differences in symptoms with sex, age and country. Interpretation This international collaboration has allowed us to report reliable symptom data from the largest cohort of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Adults over 60 and children admitted to hospital with COVID-19 are less likely to present with typical symptoms. Nausea and vomiting are common atypical presentations under 30 years. Confusion is a frequent atypical presentation of COVID-19 in adults over 60 years. Women are less likely to experience typical symptoms than men.

BackgroundUpper respiratory tract infections are the leading cause of misuse of antibiotics, a problem that leads to unnecessary adverse events and antibiotic resistance. Antibiotic prescription in Ecuador was analyzed in order to evaluate the state of antibiotic prescribing for upper respiratory tract infections. Both the appropriateness and adequacy of prescribing was evaluated. Appropriateness represents the percentage of prescriptions that are indicated; adequacy refers to the percentage of patients requiring antibiotics who are treated.MethodsThe aim of the study is to analyze the appropriateness and adequacy of antibiotic prescription for upper respiratory tract infections in the Ambulatory Health Centers of the Ministry of Public Health of Ecuador. This is a cross-sectional study of patients from one Health Center of the Ministry of Public Health in the District 17D03 in Ecuador during 2015 with upper respiratory tract infection as a primary diagnosis.ResultsWe included a total of 1393 patients in the analysis. Out of the 1393 patients identified, 523 were prescribed antibiotics, constituting an antibiotic prescription rate of 37.5%, and 51 required antibiotics, reflecting a real need of antibiotics of 3.7%. Appropriateness: Of these 523 patients who were treated, 51 required an antibiotic, resulting in an appropriate antibiotic prescription rate of 9.75%. Adequacy: When analyzing each individual case, 33 of these 51 patients received an antibiotic, constituting an adequate prescription rate of 64.7%.ConclusionsThe results of our study report a 90.25% of inappropriate prescription. The antibiotic prescription, appropriate prescription, and adequate prescription rates show the need for implementation of strategies in order to reduce them. Related aspects regarding prescriber’s behavior and the patient’s expectations should be analyzed.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s40360-018-0237-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) COVID-19 dataset is one of the largest international databases of prospectively collected clinical data on people hospitalized with COVID-19. This dataset was compiled during the COVID-19 pandemic by a network of hospitals that collect data using the ISARIC-World Health Organization Clinical Characterization Protocol and data tools. The database includes data from more than 705,000 patients, collected in more than 60 countries and 1,500 centres worldwide. Patient data are available from acute hospital admissions with COVID-19 and outpatient follow-ups. The data include signs and symptoms, pre-existing comorbidities, vital signs, chronic and acute treatments, complications, dates of hospitalization and discharge, mortality, viral strains, vaccination status, and other data. Here, we present the dataset characteristics, explain its architecture and how to gain access, and provide tools to facilitate its use.

Background Clinical guidelines (CG) are used to reduce variability in practice when the scientific evidence is sparse or when multiple therapies are available. The development and implementation of evidence-based CG is intended to organize and provide the best available evidence to support clinical decision making in order to improve quality of care. Upper respiratory tract infections (URTI) are the leading cause of misuse of antibiotics and a CG may reduce the unnecessary antibiotic prescription. Methods The aim of this quasi-experimental, before-after study was to analyze the short- and long-term effects of the implementation of a CG to decrease the rate of antibiotic prescription in URTI cases in the emergency department of a third level private hospital in Quito, Ecuador. The study included 444 patients with a main diagnosis of URTI. They were distributed in three groups: a baseline cohort 2011 (n = 114), a first post-implementation cohort 2011 (n = 114), and a later post-implementation cohort 2018 (n = 216). The implementation strategy consisted of five key steps: acceptance of the need for implementation of the CG, dissemination of the CG, an educational campaign, constant feedback, and sustainability of the strategy through continuous training. Results The results of this study show a 42.90% of antibiotic prescription rate before the CG implementation. After the implementation of the CG, the prescription rate of antibiotics was significantly reduced by 24.5% (42.9% vs 18.4%, p<0.0001) and the appropriate antibiotic prescription rate was significantly increased by 44.2% (22.4% vs 66.6%, p<0.0001) in the first post-implementation cohort 2011. There was not a significant difference in antibiotic prescription rate and appropriate antibiotic prescription rate between two post-implementation cohorts: 18.4% vs 25.9% (p = 0.125) and 66.6% vs 50% (p = 0.191), respectively. Conclusions The implementation of CGs decreases the rate of antibiotic prescription in URTI cases. The results are remarkable after early implementation, but the effect persists over time. The emphasis must shift from guideline development to strategy implementation.