Clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in hospitalized children during the Omicron variant predominant period

IntroductionInformation regarding the clinical manifestations and outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in children under the Omicron variant predominant period is still limited.MethodsA nationwide retrospective cohort study was conducted. Pediatric COVID-19 patients (<18 years of age) hospitalized between August 1, 2021 and March 31, 2022 were enrolled. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics between the Delta variant predominant period (August 1 to December 31, 2021) and the Omicron variant predominant period (January 1 to March 31, 2022) were compared.ResultsDuring the study period, 458 cases in the Delta predominant period and 389 cases in the Omicron predominant period were identified. Median age was younger (6.0 vs. 8.0 years, P = 0.004) and underlying diseases were more common (n = 65, 16.7% vs. n = 53, 11.6%) in the Omicron predominant period than those in the Delta variant predominant era. For clinical manifestations, fever ≥38.0 °C at 2 to <13 years old, sore throat at ≥ 13 years, and seizures at 2 to <13 years old were more commonly observed, and dysgeusia and olfactory dysfunction at ≥ 6 years old were less commonly observed in the Omicron variant predominant period. The number of patients requiring noninvasive oxygen support was higher in the Omicron predominant period than that in the Delta predominant period; however, intensive care unit admission rates were similar and no patients died in both periods.ConclusionsIn the Omicron variant predominant period, more pediatric COVID-19 patients experienced fever and seizures, although the overall outcomes were still favorable.     

Curbing the Delta Surge: Clinical Outcomes After Treatment With Bamlanivimab-Etesevimab,Casirivimab-Imdevimab,or Sotrovimab for Mild to Moderate Coronavirus Disease 2019

ObjectiveTo describe and compare the clinical outcomes of bamlanivimab-etesevimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, and sotrovimab treatment of mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) B.1.617.2 Delta surge.MethodsThis is a retrospective study of high-risk patients who received bamlanivimab-etesevimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, and sotrovimab for mild to moderate COVID-19 between August 1, 2021, and December 1, 2021. Rates of severe disease, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, and death were assessed.ResultsAmong 10,775 high-risk patients who received bamlanivimab-etesevimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, or sotrovimab for mild to moderate COVID-19 during the Delta surge, 287 patients (2.7%) developed severe disease that led to hospitalization, oxygen supplementation, or death within 30 days after treatment. The rates of severe disease were low among patients treated with bamlanivimab-etesevimab (1.2%), casirivimab-imdevimab (2.9%), and sotrovimab (1.6%; P<.01). The higher rate of severe outcomes among patients treated with casirivimab-imdevimab may be related to a significantly lower COVID-19 vaccination rate in that cohort. Intensive care unit admission was comparable among patients treated bamlanivimab-etesevimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, or sotrovimab (1.0%, 1.0%, and 0.4%, respectively).ConclusionThis real-world study of a large cohort of high-risk patients shows low rates of severe disease, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, and mortality after treatment with bamlanivimab-etesevimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, and sotrovimab for mild to moderate COVID-19 during the SARS-CoV-2 Delta surge.     

Epidemiological study using IgM and IgG antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 in The University of Tokyo,Japan (UT-CATS)

IntroductionThe worldwide pandemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has continued to date. Given that some of the patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are asymptomatic, antibody tests are useful to determine whether there is a previous infection with SARS-CoV-2. In this study, we measured IgM and IgG antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 in the serum of asymptomatic healthy subjects in The University of Tokyo, Japan.MethodsFrom June 2020, we recruited participants, who were students, staff, and faculty members of The University of Tokyo in the project named The University of Tokyo COVID-19 Antibody Titer Survey (UT-CATS). Following blood sample collection, participants were required to answer an online questionnaire about their social and health information. We measured IgG and IgM titers against SARS-CoV-2 using iFlash-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG detection kit which applies a chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) for the qualitative detection.ResultsThere were 6609 volunteers in this study. After setting the cutoff value at 10 AU/mL, 32 (0.48%) were positive for IgG and 16 (0.24%) for IgM. Of six participants with a history of COVID-19, five were positive for IgG, whereas all were negative for IgM. The median titer of IgG was 0.40 AU/mL and 0.39 AU/mL for IgM. Both IgG and IgM titers were affected by gender, age, smoking status, and comorbidities.ConclusionsPositive rates of IgG and IgM titers were relatively low in our university. Serum levels of these antibodies were affected by several factors, which might affect the clinical course of COVID-19.     

COVID-19 in Health Care Personnel: Significance of Health Care Role,Contact History,and Symptoms in Those Who Test Positive for SARS-CoV-2 Infection

ObjectiveTo identify significant factors that help predict whether health care personnel (HCP) will test positive for severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).Patients and MethodsWe conducted a prospective cohort study among 7015 symptomatic HCP from March 25, 2020, through November 11, 2020. We analyzed the associations between health care role, contact history, symptoms, and a positive nasopharyngeal swab SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test results, using univariate and multivariable modelling.ResultsOf the symptomatic HCP, 624 (8.9%) were positive over the study period. On multivariable analysis, having a health care role other than physician or advanced practice provider, contact with family or community member with known or suspected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and seven individual symptoms (cough, anosmia, ageusia, fever, myalgia, chills, and headache) were significantly associated with higher adjusted odds ratios for testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. For each increase in symptom number, the odds of testing positive nearly doubled (odds ratio, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.82 to 2.07, P<.001).ConclusionSymptomatic HCP have higher adjusted odds of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 based on three distinct factors: (1) nonphysician/advanced practice provider role, (2) contact with a family or community member with suspected or known COVID-19, and (3) specific symptoms and symptom number. Differences among health care roles, which persisted after controlling for contacts, may reflect the influence of social determinants. Contacts with COVID-19–positive patients and/or HCP were not associated with higher odds of testing positive, supporting current infection control efforts. Targeted symptom and contact questionnaires may streamline symptomatic HCP testing for COVID-19.     

Immunochromatography and chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay for COVID-19 diagnosis

IntroductionThe rapid and accurate detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is required to prevent the spread of COVID-19. This study evaluated the utility of two SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection methods.MethodsWe evaluated two types of antigen detection methods using immunochromatography (Espline) and quantitative chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (Lumipulse). RT-PCR was performed as a standard procedure for COVID-19 diagnosis. Lumipulse and RT-PCR were performed for all 486 nasopharyngeal swabs and 136 saliva samples, and the Espline test was performed for 271 nasopharyngeal swabs and 93 saliva samples.ResultsThe sensitivity and specificity of the Espline test were 10/11 and 260/260 (100%), respectively for the nasopharyngeal swabs and 3/9 and 84/84 (100%), respectively for the saliva samples. High sensitivities for both saliva (8/9) and nasopharyngeal swabs (22/24) were observed in the Lumipulse test. The specificities of the Lumipulse test for nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva samples were 460/462 (99.6%) and 123/127 (96.9%), respectively.ConclusionThe Espline test is not effective for saliva samples but is useful for simple and rapid COVID-19 tests using nasopharyngeal swabs because it does not require special devices. The Lumipulse test is a powerful high-throughput tool for COVID-19 diagnosis because it has high detection performance for nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva samples.     

Outcomes of COVID-19 With the Mayo Clinic Model of Care and Research

ObjectiveTo report the Mayo Clinic experience with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related to patient outcomes.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective chart review of patients with COVID-19 diagnosed between March 1, 2020, and July 31, 2020, at any of the Mayo Clinic sites. We abstracted pertinent comorbid conditions such as age, sex, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index variables, and treatments received. Factors associated with hospitalization and mortality were assessed in univariate and multivariate models.ResultsA total of 7891 patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection with research authorization on file received care across the Mayo Clinic sites during the study period. Of these, 7217 patients were adults 18 years or older who were analyzed further. A total of 897 (11.4%) patients required hospitalization, and 354 (4.9%) received care in the intensive care unit (ICU). All hospitalized patients were reviewed by a COVID-19 Treatment Review Panel, and 77.5% (695 of 897) of inpatients received a COVID-19–directed therapy. Overall mortality was 1.2% (94 of 7891), with 7.1% (64 of 897) mortality in hospitalized patients and 11.3% (40 of 354) in patients requiring ICU care.ConclusionMayo Clinic outcomes of patients with COVID-19 infection in the ICU, hospital, and community compare favorably with those reported nationally. This likely reflects the impact of interprofessional multidisciplinary team evaluation, effective leveraging of clinical trials and available treatments, deployment of remote monitoring tools, and maintenance of adequate operating capacity to not require surge adjustments. These best practices can help guide other health care systems with the continuing response to the COVID-19 pandemic.     

No SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected in the convalescent plasma of COVID-19 patients with different disease severity

IntroductionConvalescent plasma transfusion (CPT), a potential therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), requires strict quality control of the donor blood. Whether to confirm the disappearance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA (RNAemia) in convalescent donor blood or not is unclear. Reports recommending the proof of viral disappearance from the blood are controversial. Foreseeing CPT in treating COVID-19 patients in Japan, we investigated RNAemia in 100 convalescent donors with mild, moderate, and severe COVID-19.MethodsBetween April 30 and July 30, 2020, we measured RNAemia in the plasma samples of donors with resolved COVID-19. Data on patients’ demographics, comorbidities, pneumonia, treatment, and real-time polymerase chain reaction results for SARS-CoV-2 were collected. Date of onset of initial symptoms or date of positive testing (for asymptomatic patients) were self-reported by the patients. Disease severity was defined as: no, mild, moderate oxygen demand, or severe (requiring mechanical ventilation).ResultsOf 100 donors (58 males [58.0%]; median age, 47 [range 22–69] years) screened as of July 30, 2020, 77 (77.0%); 19 (19.0%); and 4 (4.0%) had mild, moderate, and severe disease, respectively. Median time between onset and testing was 68.5 (range, 21–167) days. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was not detected in any of the plasma samples.ConclusionRNAemia was not found in recovered COVID-19 patients at least 21, 27, and 57 days after the onset of mild, moderate, and severe symptoms. Our study may contribute to determining a suitable time for collecting convalescent plasma from COVID-19 patients and to future CPT use.     

Development and Validation of a Multivariable Risk Prediction Model for COVID-19 Mortality in the Southern United States

ObjectiveTo evaluate clinical characteristics of patients admitted to the hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Southern United States and development as well as validation of a mortality risk prediction model.Patients and MethodsSouthern Louisiana was an early hotspot during the pandemic, which provided a large collection of clinical data on inpatients with COVID-19. We designed a risk stratification model to assess the mortality risk for patients admitted to the hospital with COVID-19. Data from 1673 consecutive patients diagnosed with COVID-19 infection and hospitalized between March 1, 2020, and April 30, 2020, was used to create an 11-factor mortality risk model based on baseline comorbidity, organ injury, and laboratory results. The risk model was validated using a subsequent cohort of 2067 consecutive hospitalized patients admitted between June 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020.ResultsThe resultant model has an area under the curve of 0.783 (95% CI, 0.76 to 0.81), with an optimal sensitivity of 0.74 and specificity of 0.69 for predicting mortality. Validation of this model in a subsequent cohort of 2067 consecutively hospitalized patients yielded comparable prognostic performance.ConclusionWe have developed an easy-to-use, robust model for systematically evaluating patients presenting to acute care settings with COVID-19 infection.     

Association of Timing and Balance of Physical Activity and Rest/Sleep With Risk of COVID-19: A UK Biobank Study

Behavioral lifestyle factors are associated with cardiometabolic disease and obesity, which are risk factors for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to investigate whether physical activity, and the timing and balance of physical activity and sleep/rest, were associated with SARS-CoV-2 positivity and COVID-19 severity. Data from 91,248 UK Biobank participants with accelerometer data and complete covariate and linked COVID-19 data to July 19, 2020, were included. The risk of SARS-CoV-2 positivity and COVID-19 severity—in relation to overall physical activity, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), balance between activity and sleep/rest, and variability in timing of sleep/rest—was assessed with adjusted logistic regression. Of 207 individuals with a positive test result, 124 were classified as having a severe infection. Overall physical activity and MVPA were not associated with severe COVID-19, whereas a poor balance between activity and sleep/rest was (odds ratio [OR] per standard deviation: 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62 to 0.81]). This finding was related to higher daytime activity being associated with lower risk (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.93) but higher movement during sleep/rest being associated with higher risk (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.42) of severe infection. Greater variability in timing of sleep/rest was also associated with increased risk (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.35). Results for testing positive were broadly consistent. In conclusion, these results highlight the importance of not just physical activity, but also quality sleep/rest and regular sleep/rest patterns, on risk of COVID-19. Our findings indicate the risk of COVID-19 was consistently approximately 1.2-fold greater per approximately 40-minute increase in variability in timing of proxy measures of sleep, indicative of irregular sleeping patterns.     

Macrovascular Thrombotic Events in a Mayo Clinic Enterprise-Wide Sample of Hospitalized COVID-19–Positive Compared With COVID-19–Negative Patients

ObjectiveTo determine the difference in the rate of thromboembolic complications between hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)–positive compared with COVID-19–negative patients.Patients and MethodsAdult patients hospitalized from January 1, 2020, through May 8, 2020, who had COVID-19 testing by polymerase chain reaction assay were identified through electronic health records across multiple hospitals in the Mayo Clinic enterprise. Thrombotic outcomes (venous and arterial) were identified from the hospital problem list.ResultsWe identified 3790 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 testing across 19 hospitals, 102 of whom had positive test results. The median age was lower in the COVID-positive patients (62 vs 67 years; P=.03). The median duration of hospitalization was longer in COVID-positive patients (8.5 vs 4 days; P<.001) and more required intensive care unit care (56.9% [58 of 102] vs 26.8% [987 of 3688]; P<.001). Comorbidities, including atrial fibrillation/flutter, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, and malignancy, were observed less frequently with COVID-positive admissions. Any venous thromboembolism was identified in 2.9% of COVID-positive patients (3 of 102) and 4.6% of COVID-negative patients (168 of 3688). The frequency of venous and arterial events was not different between the groups. The unadjusted odds ratio (OR) for COVID-positive–patients for any venous thromboembolism was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.19 to 2.02). A multivariable logistic regression model evaluated death within 30 days of hospital discharge; neither COVID positivity (adjusted OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.54 to 2.34) nor thromboembolism (adjusted OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.32) was associated with death.ConclusionEarly experience in patients with COVID-19 across multiple academic and regional hospitals representing different US regions demonstrates a lower than previously reported incidence of thrombotic events. This incidence was not higher than a contemporary COVID-negative hospitalized comparator.     

Effectiveness of the third dose of BNT162b2 vaccine on neutralizing Omicron variant in the Japanese population

IntroductionThe vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 provides humoral immunity to fight COVID-19; however, the acquired immunity gradually declines. Booster vaccination restores reduced humoral immunity; however, its effect on newly emerging variants, such as the Omicron variant, is a concern. As the waves of COVID-19 cases and vaccine programs differ between countries, it is necessary to know the domestic effect of the booster.MethodsSerum samples were obtained from healthcare workers (20–69 years old) in the Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine program at the Toyama University Hospital 6 months after the second dose (6mA2D, n = 648) and 2 weeks after the third dose (2wA3D, n = 565). The anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody level was measured, and neutralization against the wild-type and variants (Delta and Omicron) was evaluated using pseudotyped viruses. Data on booster-related events were collected using questionnaires.ResultsThe median anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody was >30.9-fold elevated after the booster (6mA2D, 710.0 U/mL [interquartile range (IQR): 443.0–1068.0 U/mL]; 2wA3D, 21927 U/mL [IQR: 15321.0–>25000.0 U/mL]). Median neutralizing activity using 100-fold sera against wild-type-, Delta-, and Omicron-derived variants was elevated from 84.6%, 36.2%, and 31.2% at 6mA2D to >99.9%, 99.1%, and 94.6% at 2wA3D, respectively. The anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels were significantly elevated in individuals with fever ≥37.5 °C, general fatigue, and myalgia, local swelling, and local hardness.ConclusionThe booster effect, especially against the Omicron variant, was observed in the Japanese population. These findings contribute to the precise understanding of the efficacy and side effects of the booster and the promotion of vaccine campaigns.     

Post–COVID-19 Syndrome (Long Haul Syndrome): Description of a Multidisciplinary Clinic at Mayo Clinic and Characteristics of the Initial Patient Cohort

ObjectiveTo describe characteristics of a series of patients reporting prolonged symptoms after an infection with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Patients and MethodsThis study describes the multidisciplinary COVID-19 Activity Rehabilitation Program, established at Mayo Clinic to evaluate and treat patients with post–COVID syndrome, and reports the clinical characteristics of the first 100 patients receiving evaluation and management during the timeframe of June 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020.ResultsThe cohort consisted of 100 patients (mean age, 45.4±14.2 years; 68% women; mean body mass index, 30.2 kg/m²; presenting a mean of 93 days after infection). Common preexisting conditions were respiratory (23%) and mental health, including depression and/or anxiety (34%). Most (75%) had not been hospitalized for COVID-19. Common presenting symptoms ware fatigue (80%), respiratory complaints (59%), and neurological complaints (59%) followed by subjective cognitive impairment, sleep disturbance, and mental health symptoms. More than one-third of patients (34%) reported difficulties in performing basic activities of daily living. Only 1 in 3 patients had returned to unrestricted work duty at the time of the analysis. For most patients, laboratory and imaging tests showed no abnormalities or were nondiagnostic despite debilitating symptoms. Most patients required physical therapy, occupational therapy, or brain rehabilitation. Face-to-face and virtual care delivery modalities were feasible.ConclusionMost of the patients did not have COVID-19–related symptoms that were severe enough to require hospitalization, were younger than 65 years, and were more likely to be female, and most had no preexisting comorbidities before severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. Symptoms including mood disorders, fatigue, and perceived cognitive impairment resulted in severe negative impacts on resumption of functional and occupational activities in patients experiencing prolonged effects.     

Pernio (Chilblains), SARS-CoV-2, and COVID Toes Unified Through Cutaneous and Systemic Mechanisms

Pernio or chilblains is characterized by erythema and swelling at acral sites (eg, toes and fingers), typically triggered by cold exposure. Clinical and histopathologic features of pernio are well described, but the pathogenesis is not entirely understood; vasospasm and a type I interferon (IFN-I) immune response are likely involved. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, dermatologists have observed an increase in pernio-like acral eruptions. Direct causality of pernio due to COVID-19 has not been established in many cases because of inconsistent testing methods (often negative results) for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, a form of COVID-19?associated pernio (also called COVID toes) is probable because of increased occurrence, frequently in young patients with no cold exposure or a history of pernio, and reports of skin biopsies with positive SARS-CoV-2 immunohistochemistry. PubMed was searched between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020 for publications using the following keywords: pernio, chilblain, and acral COVID-19. On the basis of our review of the published literature, we speculate that several unifying cutaneous and systemic mechanisms may explain COVID-19?associated pernio: (1) SARS-CoV-2 cell infection occurs through the cellular receptor angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 mediated by transmembrane protease serine 2, subsequently affecting the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system with an increase in the vasoconstricting, pro-inflammatory, and prothrombotic angiotensin II pathway. (2) Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 cell infection triggers an immune response with robust IFN-I release in patients predisposed to COVID-19?associated pernio. (3) Age and sex discrepancies correlated with COVID-19 severity and manifestations, including pernio as a sign of mild disease, are likely explained by age-related immune and vascular differences influenced by sex hormones and genetics, which affect susceptibility to viral cellular infection, the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system balance, and the IFN-I response.     

Factors affecting the sensitivity of quantitative severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antigen test

IntroductionThe accuracy of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) is affected by various factors; however, studies examining the factors affecting the accuracy of quantitative severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antigen test (QAT) are limited.MethodsA total of 347 nasopharyngeal samples were collected from patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and the date of onset was obtained from the electronic medical records. The SARS-CoV-2 antigen level was measured using Lumipulse Presto SARS-CoV-2 Ag (Presto), while NAAT was performed using the Ampdirect 2019-nCoV Detection Kit.ResultsPresto had a sensitivity rate of 95.1% (95% confidence interval: 92.8–97.4) in detecting the SARS-CoV-2 antigen in 347 samples. The number of days from symptom onset to sample collection was negatively correlated with the amount of antigen (r = −0.515) and sensitivity of Presto (r = −0.711). The patients’ age was lower in the Presto-negative samples (median age, 39 years) compared with that in the Presto-positive samples (median age, 53 years; p < 0.01). A significant positive correlation was observed between age (excluding teenagers) and Presto sensitivity (r = 0.764). Meanwhile, no association was found between the mutant strain, sex, and Presto results.ConclusionPresto is useful for the accurate diagnosis of COVID-19 owing to its high sensitivity when the number of days from symptom onset to sample collection is within 12 days. Furthermore, age may affect the results of Presto, and this tool has a relatively low sensitivity in younger patients.     

Characteristics,Treatment Patterns,and Clinical Outcomes After Heart Failure Hospitalizations During the COVID-19 Pandemic,March to October 2020

ObjectiveTo compare clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and 30-day all-cause readmission and mortality between patients hospitalized for heart failure (HF) before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.Patients and MethodsThe study was conducted at 16 hospitals across 3 geographically dispersed US states. The study included 6769 adults (mean age, 74 years; 56% [5033 of 8989] men) with cumulative 8989 HF hospitalizations: 2341 hospitalizations during the COVID-19 pandemic (March 1 through October 30, 2020) and 6648 in the pre–COVID-19 (October 1, 2018, through February 28, 2020) comparator group. We used Poisson regression, Kaplan-Meier estimates, multivariable logistic, and Cox regression analysis to determine whether prespecified study outcomes varied by time frames.ResultsThe adjusted 30-day readmission rate decreased from 13.1% (872 of 6648) in the pre–COVID-19 period to 10.0% (234 of 2341) in the COVID-19 pandemic period (relative risk reduction, 23%; hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.89). Conversely, all-cause mortality increased from 9.7% (645 of 6648) in the pre–COVID-19 period to 11.3% (264 of 2341) in the COVID-19 pandemic period (relative risk increase, 16%; number of admissions needed for one additional death, 62.5; hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.39). Despite significant differences in rates of index hospitalization, readmission, and mortality across the study time frames, the disease severity, HF subtypes, and treatment patterns remained unchanged (P>0.05).ConclusionThe findings of this large tristate multicenter cohort study of HF hospitalizations suggest lower rates of index hospitalizations and 30-day readmissions but higher incidence of 30-day mortality with broadly similar use of HF medication, surgical interventions, and devices during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with the pre–COVID-19 time frame.