Objective

To evaluate the adoption and discontinuation of four broadly used non-pharmaceutical interventions on shifts in the covid-19 burden among US states.

Design

Retrospective, observational cohort study.

Setting

US state data on covid-19 between 19 January 2020 and 7 March 2021.

Participants

US population with a diagnosis of covid-19.

Main outcome measures

Empirically derived breakpoints in case and mortality velocities (ie, rate of change) were used to identify periods of stable, decreasing, or increasing covid-19 burden. Associations between adoption of non-pharmaceutical interventions and subsequent decreases in case or death rates were estimated by use of generalised linear models accounting for weekly variability across US states. State level case and mortality counts per day were obtained from the Covid-19 Tracking Project. State level policies on non-pharmaceutical interventions included stay-at-home orders, indoor public gathering bans (mild >10 or severe ≤10 people), indoor restaurant dining bans, and public mask mandates. National policies were not included in statistical models.

Results

28 602 830 cases and 511 899 deaths were recorded during the study. Odds of a reduction in covid-19 case velocity increased for stay-at-home orders (odds ratio 2.02, 95% confidence interval 1.63 to 2.52), indoor dining bans (1.62, 1.25 to 2.10), public mask mandates (2.18, 1.47 to 3.23), and severe indoor public gathering bans (1.68, 1.31 to 2.16) in univariate analysis. In mutually adjusted models, odds remained elevated for orders to stay at home (adjusted odds ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.04 to 2.07) and public mask mandates (2.27, 1.51 to 3.41). Stay-at-home orders (odds ratio 2.00, 95% confidence interval 1.53 to 2.62; adjusted odds ratio 1.89, 95% confidence interval 1.25 to 2.87) was also associated with a greater likelihood of decrease in death velocity in unadjusted and adjusted models.

Conclusions

State level non-pharmaceutical interventions used in the US during the covid-19 pandemic, in particular stay-at-home orders, were associated with a decreased covid-19 burden.

BACKGROUND: Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are mitigation strategies used to reduce the spread of transmissible diseases. The relative effectiveness of specific NPIs remains uncertain. METHODS: We used state-level Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case and mortality data between January 19, 2020 and March 7, 2021 to model NPI policy effectiveness. Empirically derived breakpoints in case and mortality velocities were used to identify periods of stable, decreasing, or increasing COVID-19 burden. The associations between NPI adoption and subsequent decreases in case or death velocities were estimated using generalized linear models accounting for weekly variability shared across states. State-level NPI policies included: stay at home order, indoor public gathering ban (mild >10 or severe ≤10), indoor restaurant dining ban, and public mask mandate. RESULTS: 28,602,830 cases and 511,899 deaths were recorded. The odds of a decrease in COVID-19 case velocity were significantly elevated for stay at home (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.63-2.52), indoor dining ban (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.25-2.10), public mask mandate (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.47-3.23), and severe gathering ban (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.31-2.16). In mutually adjusted models, odds remained elevated for stay at home (AOR 1.47, 95% CI 1.04-2.07) and public mask mandate (AOR = 2.27, 95% CI 1.51-3.41). Stay at home (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.53-2.62; AOR 1.89, 95% CI 1.25-2.87) was also associated with greater likelihood of decrease in death velocity in unadjusted and adjusted models. CONCLUSIONS: NPIs employed in the U.S. during the COVID-19 pandemic, most significantly stay at home orders, were associated with decreased COVID-19 burden.

Objectives

To evaluate characteristics and outcomes of patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (AMICS) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has created challenges in delivering acute cardiovascular care. Quality measures and outcomes of patients presenting with AMICS during COVID-19 in the United States have not been well described.

Methods

We identified 406 patients from the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative (NCSI) with AMICS and divided them into those presenting before (N = 346, 5/9/2016-2/29/2020) and those presenting during the COVID-19 pandemic (N = 60, 3/1/2020-11/10/2020). We compared baseline clinical data, admission characteristics, and outcomes.

Results

The median age of the cohort was 64 years, and 23.7% of the group was female. There were no significant differences in age, sex, and medical comorbidities between the two groups. Patients presenting during the pandemic were less likely to be Black compared to those presenting prior. Median door to balloon (90 vs. 88 min, p = 0.38), door to support (88 vs. 78 min, p = 0.13), and the onset of shock to support (74 vs. 62 min, p = 0.15) times were not significantly different between the two groups. Patients presented with ST-elevation myocardial infarction more often during the COVID-19 period (95.0% vs. 80.0%, p = 0.005). In adjusted logistic regression models, COVID-19 period did not significantly associate with survival to discharge (odds ratio [OR] 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54-2.19, p = 0.81) or with 1-month survival (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.42-1.61, p = 0.56).

Conclusions

Care of patients presenting with AMICS has remained robust among hospitals participating in the NCSI during the COVID-19 pandemic.