Using Clinical and Biochemical Parameters for Safer Discharges in COVID-19: A Comparative Study

Victoria Lashmar¹, Seshnag Siddavaram², Leon D’Cruz^3,4, Abubakar Khan², Syed Arshad Husain^2*
1Internal Medicine Trainee, Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells (MTW) NHS Trust, Maidstone, Kent, England, UK
²Respiratory Medicine Department, Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells (MTW) NHS Trust, Maidstone, Kent, England, UK
³Northern Ireland Centre for Stratified Medicine, Biomedical Sciences Research Institute, Ulster University, Northern Ireland, UK
⁴Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK

Corresponding Author: Syed A Husain ^{ORCID iD}
Address: Consultant in Respiratory Medicine and General Internal Medicine, Respiratory Medicine Department, Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells (MTW) NHS Trust, Maidstone, Kent, England, UK.
Received date: 17 February 2021; Accepted date: 22 March 2021; Published date: 29 March 2021

Citation: Lashmar V, Siddavaram S, D’Cruz LG, Khan AB, Husain SA. Using Clinical and Biochemical Parameters for Safer Discharges in COVID-19: A Comparative Study. J Health Care and Research. 2021 Mar 29;2(1):33-45.

Copyright © 2021 Lashmar V, Siddavaram S, D’Cruz LG, Khan AB, Husain SA. This is an open-access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Keywords: COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Biochemical Parameters, Discharge, Eosinopenia

Abstract

The objective of this retrospective case control study was to determine clinical and biochemical parameters associated with a poorer prognostic outcome in both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 pneumonias and use these to create safe discharge guidelines.
This study in a single respiratory ward of a district general hospital compared admission and discharge C- reactive protein (CRP) levels, eosinophil and lymphocyte counts, respiratory rate, oxygen saturations and NEWS2 score from two groups of patients admitted with either confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia (46 patients) or pneumonia of other aetiology (45 patients). Outcome was defined as either ‘good’ or ‘poor’.
Combined values of prognostic markers analysed by binary logistic regression followed by ROC analysis showed a final combined AUC value of 0.955 thus yielding a test that had a better prognostic capability in predicting the outcome of patients with COVID-19. This combined test could be used to guide safe discharge of patients with COVID-19.