Epidemiological and clinical features of imported and local patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Hainan, China

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-26340/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Epidemiological and clinical features of imported and local patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Hainan, China

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-26340/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background

Hainan Island, a popular tourist destination, had received many imported cases of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but successfully contained the epidemics in one month. We described epidemiological and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in Hainan and compared these features between imported and local cases to provide information for other international epidemic areas.

Methods

We included 91 patients (56 imported and 35 local cases) from two designed hospitals for COVID-19 in Haikou, China, from January 20 to February 19, 2020. Data on demographic, epidemiological, clinical and laboratory characteristics were extracted from medical records.

Results

Of the 91 patients, 78 (85.7%) patients were diagnosed within the first three weeks after the first case identified (Day 1: Jan 22, 2020), while the number of local cases started to increase from the third week. No new cases occurred after Day 29. Fever and cough were two main clinical manifestations. 15 (16.5%) were severe, 14 (15.4%) had complicated infections, nine (9.9%) were admitted to ICU, and three died. Median duration of viral shedding in feces was longer than that in nasopharyngeal swabs (19 days vs 16 days, P =0.007). Compared with local cases, imported cases were older, have higher incidence of fever and concurrent infections. There was no difference in outcomes between the two groups.

Conclusion

Imported cases were more severe than local cases, but could have similar prognosis. The short epidemic period in Hainan suggests that the epidemics could be quickly brought under control if proper timely measures were taken.

Infectious Diseases

Health Policy

coronavirus disease 2019

severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2

epidemiology

clinical features

prevention and control

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and characterized by lung damage, was first reported in Wuhan, China in December 2019 [1, 2]. By April 27, 2020, it has spread to 210 countries worldwide, causing 3014895 cases and 207928 deaths, with crude mortality of 6.9% [3]. Although the COVID-19 is likely a zoonotic disease, it could be transmitted from person to person [4, 5], with a reproductive number of 1.5-4 [6, 7]. COVID-19 was mainly transmitted by contact and droplet. Recently, it was reported that SARS-CoV-2 was detected and isolated in feces, tears and urine [8, 9], suggesting that the disease may be transmitted through the digestive tract and conjunctiva. At present, the numbers of COVID-19 cases in USA, Italy and other countries are increasing rapidly, many of which were local incident cases [3]. As known to all, the containment of epidemic at early age is most critical, effective and efficient before the outbreak go out of control. Most of countries have just started local transmission by receiving imported cases that could still be possibly contained. However, whether there is a difference between local cases and imported cases in clinical and epidemiological characteristics is unclear.

Hainan province, is a popular domestic and international tourist destination with 9.34 million permanent residents. During the spring festival holiday, many people, including those from Wuhan and its surrounding areas, chose to spend their vacations on Hainan island. According to the statistics, from December 30, 2019 to January 22, the day before Wuhan was locked-down, about 74,600 tourists had travelled from Wuhan to Hainan by plane [10]. In Hainan Province, the first reported case of COVID-19 was reported on January 22, 2020 (Day 1), and the last confirmed patient on February 19, 2020 (Day 29) (Fig. 1) [11], the relative short epidemics period implies that the measures Hainan adopted to contain the epidemics were timely and successful. Thus, Hainan’s experience may have important implication for other international epidemics areas.

This study describes epidemiological and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in Hainan and compares these features between imported and local cases, which may be an instructive example for countries and regions that are vulnerable for upcoming epidemics.

Study design and participants

We retrospectively included all the patients with COVID-19 in Hainan General hospital and The Second Affiliated Hospital of Hainan Medical University from January 22 to February 19, 2020. These two hospitals were designated hospitals for treating adult patients in Haikou, the capital city of Hainan province. Patients were followed-up until April 7 (Day 78), 2020. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Hainan General Hospital and The Second Affiliated Hospital of Hainan Medical University (HN-2020-31), and oral consents were obtained from all patients. All patients with COVID-19 enrolled in this study were diagnosed according to the WHO interim guidance [12], and were divided into imported cases group and local cases group according to epidemiological data.

Definitions

Imported case was defined as the patients who came from the COVID-19 epidemic area (Hubei province) within 14 days or came from the COVID-19 epidemic area and could not trace the source of infection. The local case was defined as the patients stayed in the locality more than 14 days before onset and had not gone to the epidemic area. If two or more confirmed cases were found concurrently and there is the possibility of human-to-human transmission due to close contact or infection due to co-exposure, then it is determined as a clustered case [13,14]. Fever was defined as axillary temperature of at least 37.3°C. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was defined according to the Berlin definition [15]. We defined the degree of severity of COVID-19 (severe vs. non-severe) at the time of admission using the American Thoracic Society guidelines for community-acquired pneumonia [16].

Data collection

The epidemiological characteristics (including residence, whether from the epidemic area, recent exposure history and so on), clinical symptoms and signs, laboratory data, chest computed tomography (CT) findings, and SARS-CoV-2 RNA were extracted from electronic medical records.

Laboratory confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection

SARS-Cov-2 RNA test was performed by the hospital’s laboratory and the key laboratory of Hainan Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), China, by real-time RT-PCR according to the Chinese national CDC recommended protocol. The nasopharyngeal swab and feces were collected every 2-7 days during hospitalization and every 7 days for two times during follow-up for discharged cases. Then the RNA samples from the nasal swab and feces specimens were extracted and subjected to the real-time RT-PCR test using SARS-CoV-2 specific primers and probes. Specifically, the primers for the open reading frame 1ab (ORF1ab) are 5’-CCCTGTGGGTTTTACACTTAA-3’(Forward) and 5’-ACGATTGTGCATCAGCTGA-3’(Reverse); the corresponding probe is 5’-CY3-CCGTCTGCGGTATGTGGAAAGGTTATGG-BHQ1-3’. Primers for nucleocapsid protein (N) are 5’-GGGGAACTTCTCCTGCTAGAAT-3’ (Forward) and 5’-CAGACATTTTGCTCTCAAGCTG-3’ (Reverse); the corresponding probe is 5’-FAM-TTGCTGCTGCTTGACAGATT-TAMRA-3’. The duration of SARS-CoV-2 shedding was defined as the time from symptom onset to the first SARS-CoV-2 RNA turned to be negative after the last SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive during the follow-up.

Statistical Analysis

Continuous variables were expressed as mean (SD) or median (IQR) and compared by the t-test or Mann-Whitney U test; categorical variables were expressed as frequency (%) and compared by χ² test or Fisher’s exact test between the imported cases and local cases. For laboratory indicators, we categorized the results into normal or abnormal (increased or decreased). We used SPSS (IBM, version 26.0) for all analyses.

Demographics and epidemiological characteristics

All the 91 patients with confirmed COVID-19 in Hainan General Hospital (n=69) and The Second Affiliated Hospital of Hainan Medical university (n=22) were enrolled. 56 of the 91 patients were imported and 35 were local patients. The mean age was 50 years (range, 21-83 years), and 52 (57.1 %) were men. This outbreak lasted one month from the first patient admitted on Jan 20, 2020, to the last patient on Feb 19, 2020 (Figure 1). Of these patients, 78 were admitted within the first three weeks after the first case identified, 88.6% (31/35) local patients were admitted from day 14, these were similar to the whole patients in Hainan Province, of all the 168 patients, 142 new cases were confirmed before day 21, and 52 local patients were diagnosed after day 14 (Figure 1). Among 56 imported patients in two hospitals, 53 (94.6%) came from the epidemic centre, Wuhan city and its surrounding area. The median interval from leaving the epidemic centre to symptom onset in 53 patients was five days (IQR 2-12, range 1-34). 42 (46.2%) had the history of contacting with the confirmed COVID-19 patients, with a median interval before onset of eight days (IQR 4-13, range 1-22). Compared to imported patients, the local patients were significantly younger (mean age, 46 years vs 52 years; P=0.03), more likely to occur in cluster outbreak (77.1% vs 46.4%, P=0.004), and had close contacting with COVID-19 patients (68.6% vs 32.1%, P=0.001) (Table 1).

Clinical characteristics and complications

The most common symptoms at onset of illness were fever (79.1%), dry cough (79.1%), expectoration (39.6%), fatigue (38.5%), and shortness of breath (29.7%), diarrhea (14.3%), nausea and vomiting (7.7%) were not rare. 87 (95.6%) patients had more than one sign or symptom, 23 patients had combined fever, cough and shortness of breath. Only four (4.4%) cases had no symptom. The median of highest temperature was 38.0℃, and the median duration of fever was eight days. Nine (9.9%) patients were admitted and transferred to the ICU because of the ARDS and organ dysfunction. The median durations from first symptoms to hospital admission, and ARDS were 5 days (IQR, 3-9) and 8 days (IQR, 6-10), respectively.

Fifteen severe patients, including 3 local and 12 imported cases. Among these patients, 14 had complicated bacterial infection, 9 septic shock, 13 ARDS, 6 multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS), and 3 patients died. Compared with local patients, the imported patients had higher prevalence of fever (91% vs 60%, P=0.001), higher peak temperature (38.0℃ vs 37.8℃, P=0.028), more complicated infection (21.4% vs 5.7%, P=0.043), and tend to be more severe (21.4% vs 8.6%) (Table 2).

Laboratory examination and imaging findings of patients with COVID-19

Of the 91 patients, 21(23.1%) had a white cell count of less than 4.0×10⁹/L, 39 (42.9%) had lymphocyte count of less than 1.1×10⁹/L. The blood lymphocyte count, platelet count and serum albumin of the imported cases were significantly lower, while the levels of blood creatine kinase and CRP were significantly higher than those in local patients (all P<0.05). All the patients had abnormality in chest CT scan, 79 (86.8%) patients’ lesions located at lung periphery, and 75 (82.4%) showed bilateral involvement. The main manifestations were ground-glass opacity (87.9%), and multiple infiltration (83.5%), and 70 (76.9%) combined with bilateral lung periphery ground-glass opacity. Less common imaging findings were nodule, consolidation and pleural effusion (Figure 2). No different imaging features were shown between imported and local patients (Table 3).

Treatment and prognosis of patients with COVID-19

The median time for patients stayed in hospital was 14 days (IQR 11-18). All the patients took Chinese traditional medicine treatment, and 89 (97.8%) patients were treated with antiviral therapy, including Lopinavir and Ritonavir (Kaletra), arbidol and atomized inhalation of interferon α. 22 patients were treated with immunoglobulin and 20 with thymosin α-1. 13 patients received short-term corticosteroids treatment, with 40-80 mg/d methylprednisolone for 3-5 days. Only one patient needed extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), but died. By Mar 24, 2020, 88 of 91 patients had been discharged, 3 patients died. All of the patients discharged had been followed up for more than 14 days by the last follow-up date, no nucleic acid detection for SARS-CoV-2 RNA turned positive. There was no significant difference in treatment, length of hospitalization and the clinical outcome between the imported and local patients (Table 4).

SARS-CoV-2 RNA in nasopharyngeal swabs and feces

We tested SARS-CoV-2 RNA in nasopharyngeal swabs and feces of all the patients at an interval of 2 to 7 days dynamically. All 91 patients had detectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA in nasopharyngeal, and 79 in feces. SARS-CoV-2 RNA could be detected in nasopharyngeal swabs and feces at a median of 11 days (IQR 6-16, range 1-39) and 13 days (IQR 10-19, range 1-40), respectively. The viral shedding duration in these two types of samples were 16 days (IQR 13-23, range 6-43 days) and 19 days (IQR 14-26, range 6-43) from onset, respectively. The duration of SARS-CoV-2 RNA being positive and viral shedding in feces were longer than that in nasopharyngeal swabs (P=0.02 and P=0.007, respectively). In samples (including nasopharyngeal swabs and feses) from three dead patients, the SARS-CoV-2 RNA remained positive on the day of death (37 days, 20 days and 17 days from symptom onset, respectively). There was no significant difference in duration of SARS-CoV-2 RNA positivity and duration of viral shedding in nasopharyngeal swabs and feces between the imported and local patients (Table 4).

According to the data released by Hainan Health Commission [11], by Mar 24, 2020, 162 of 168 patients had been discharged, 6 patients died, with the mortality rate of 3.6%. No new cases occurred from Feb 19, 2020 [14]. The 91 cases in study accounted for 54.2% of all the confirmed cases in Hainan, with similar trend in epidemic course (see Fig. 1). Of the 91 patients, three patients died. The mortality was 3.3%, which also similar to that of the whole Hainan province.

Our study shows that during the 29-day epidemic period, most of the patients were diagnosed within the first three weeks after the first identified imported case. In the early period, imported cases were predominant. In the later period, local cases were more common and 77.1% of the patients appeared clustering, mainly in families. However, the local cases did not lead to continuous community transmission, reflected by the short epidemic period (29 days). This may be attributed to the effective implementation of prevention and control policies and self-protection awareness of the public in Hainan (Fig. 1). The measures include establishing fever clinic for screening suspicious patients, designating hospitals focusing on treating patients with COVID-19 [17], raising the level of emergency response to COVID-19 prevention and control to first level promptly at Day 4. At the same time, other measures also work well for blocking the routes of transmission and reducing the chance of infection. For examples, encouraging the public to wear face masks, wash hands more frequently, and stay at home unless necessary, activating joint prevention and control mechanism, cross-sectors control for traffic control at community level. Moreover, delaying the resumption of work and school, implementing work-from-home for employee and online teaching for students were adopted to reduce the probability of cluster [18]. The reported estimate incubation time of the SARS-CoV‐2 was based on limited data. Zhong reported the median incubation period was 4 days in 291 cases in China [19]. Jiang Xu et al. find there is no observable difference between the incubation time for SARS‐CoV‐2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS‐CoV), and middle east respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS‐CoV), with a mean of 4.9 days for SARS‐CoV‐2, 4.7 days for SARS, and 5.8 days for MERS [20]. To avoid the risk of virus spread, all potentially exposed subjects are required to be isolated for 14 days, which is the longest predicted incubation time. Our epidemiological investigation for 53 patients from Wuhan found that the median time of symptom onset was 5 days, with a range of 1 day to 34 days. The patient with the longest incubation period, a male in their 70’s, flew from Wuhan to Hainan on January 2, 2020 and had no contact with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients. He occasionally went to the farmers' market near his residence to buy vegetables, but there were no confirmed COVID-19 patients associated with the market. He developed symptoms on February 5 and was diagnosed on February 7, 2020 [11]. This particular case indicates that the longest incubation time may be more than 34 days.

This study showed the main symptoms of the patients in Hainan Province were fever, cough, and 30% of the patients had shortness of breath. Compared with early COVID-19 cases in Wuhan, diarrhea (14.3%) was relatively more common in Hainan patients [21]. 15 (16.5%) patients were severe, 12 of them were imported cases and three were local cases. The main complications include infections and ARDS. Six severe cases developed to MODS. In general, the proportion of severe patients and mortality are lower than that of Wuhan and similar to the national data [22, 23].

In the imported cases, the proportion of patients with fever, the peak temperature, the level of blood CRP, the proportion of severe cases, and the incidence of complications, especially infections, were higher than those in the local cases. Meanwhile, the lymphocyte and platelets counts were significantly lower in imported cases than that of local ones. Data showed imported cases were older and coexisting illness was more common than the local ones, which might demonstrate why the imported ones are severer. Another possible explanation is that the time of infecting SARA-CoV-2 in imported cases is earlier, with a more virulent virus subtype. However, this requires further study of genomic and pathogenicity of SARA-CoV-2 at different stages of transmission. Tang's research indicates that the SARS-CoV-2 had formed two subtypes of S and L during the transmission process, and changes in viral genes will cause changes in its pathogenicity and transmission [24]. The similar study had been corroborated in the study of the MERS virus, which had shown that the virus becomes weaker during transmission [25]. It remains to be further studied whether there is virus mutation in the process of virus transmission from imported cases to local cases, which may lead to the weakening of its pathogenicity.

All 91 patients, including four asymptomatic patients, had CT changes in the lungs, which mainly manifested as ground-glass opacity in lung periphery at early stage. However, as the disease progressed, some patients had pulmonary consolidation and pleural effusion. Therefore, pulmonary CT examination is a sensitive indicator for the screening of COVID-19 and is recommended for all suspected patients [26].

Even so, SARS-CoV-2 RNA is the direct evidence for confirming COVID-19. Among all our patients, SARS-COV-2 RNA were detected in nasopharyngeal swab, but RNA was not detected in 12 patients’ feces. Due to the positive detecting of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in feces, the problem of gastrointestinal transmission and even aerosol transmission has attracted broad attention. Since then, multiple research teams have isolated viruses in the feces, further illustrating the risk of gastrointestinal transmission. However, for a new viral infectious disease, there is no exact data on how long virus would be shed through respiratory and digestive tract. Our study found that the median duration of fecal SARS-CoV-2 shedding was longer than that in nasopharyngeal swabs, which was 19 and 16 days, respectively. And the longest time of SARS-CoV-2 RNA persistent positive and viral shedding were 40 days and 43 days, respectively. The relative long virus shedding duration could impose great challenge for health system as the patient pool flows slow and taking up substantial health facility. While it is impossible to host all positive cases in hospitals throughout the virus shedding period, it is possible to shift less acute cases to other temporary facilities like Wuhan. It is worth noting that the nasopharyngeal swabs and feces collected on the day of death of the three critically ill patients were still positive. This suggests that the persistence of the virus may have an impact on disease prognosis, and it is urgent to screen and develop effective antiviral drugs.

Unfortunately, until now, there are no effective antiviral drugs. Drugs such as remdesivir, kaletra, arbidol, chloroquine phosphate and some Chinese traditional medicine have shown certain effects, but still lack of rigorous and proven evidence [27–30]. Clinical trials of these drugs are currently ongoing. Treatment of all our patients was basically based on the interferon alpha nebulization, plus the antiviral regimen of arbidol or kaletra. However, without controlled study, it is difficult to determine whether it is the natural fluctuation of the virus replication or the effect of the drug.

There are some limitations in this study: Due to the barriers to data collection, clinical data of all 168 patients in the entire Hainan Province have not been collected.

Our study revealed the epidemiological and clinical characteristics, and outcomes of imported and local cases outside Hubei Province, suggesting that the imported cases were more severe than local cases, but the prognosis could be similarly good. The short epidemic period in Hainan suggests that the epidemics could be quickly brought under control if proper timely measures were taken. This study also suggests that the longest incubation period for COVID-19 may be over 34 days, and the maximum duration of SARS-CoV-2 shedding is at least 43 days.

COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019; SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; ARDS, acute respiratory distress syndrome; CT, computed tomography; CRP, C-reactive protein; PCT, procalcitonin; CDC, Centre for Disease Control and Prevention; MODS, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome; ECMO, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Hainan General Hospital and The Second Affiliated Hospital of Hainan Medical University (HN-2020-31), oral consents were obtained from all patients.

Consent for publication

Written informed consent for publication of the clinical details was obtained from the patient. A copy of the consent form is available for review by the Editor of this journal.

Availability of data and materials

With the permission of the corresponding authors, we can provide participant data without names and identifiers, but not the study protocol, statistical analysis plan, or informed consent form. Data can be provided after the Article is published. Once the data can be made public, the research team will provide an email address for communication. The corresponding authors have the right to decide whether to share the data or not based on the research objectives and plan provided.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding

This study was funded by the National Science and Technology Major Project (Bing-Liang Lin, 2018ZX10302204, Bing-Liang Lin, 2017ZX10203201003), Emergency special program for 2019-nCoV of Guangdong province science and technology project (GDSTP-ESP) (Zhi-Liang Gao, 2020B111105001) and Tackling of key scientific and emergency special program of Sun Yat-sen University [SYSU-TKSESP, Bing-Liang Lin].

Authors' contributions

B Wu, ZY Lei, KL Wu, JR He, J Fu, F Chen, Y Chen, B Chen, XL Zhou, T Wu, YG D, SX Chen, FR Xiao, J He, F Lin and BL Lin collected the epidemiological and clinical data and processed statistical data. ZY Lei, HJ Cao and BL Lin drafted the manuscript. BL Lin, F Lin and J He revised the final manuscript. BL Lin and F Lin are responsible for summarizing all data related to the virus and clinical data. B Wu and KL Wu are responsible for summarizing all epidemiological data. F Lin, B Wu and BL Lin provided administrative, technical, or material support. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

We thank all patients involved in the study. We thank Mrs. Xulan Fu, Hao Lin for proofreading this manuscript. Jian-Rong He was supported by China Scholarship Council-University of Oxford Joint Scholarship.

Zhou P, Yang XL, Wang XG, Hu B, Zhang L, Zhang W, et al. A pneumonia outbreak associated with a new coronavirus of probable bat origin. Nature 2020 Feb 3. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2012-7
Zhu N, Zhang D, Wang W, Li X, Yang B, Song J, et al. A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(8):727-33. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2001017.
COVID-19 Coronavirus – Update. https://virusncov.com/ (accessed April 27, 2020)
Huang C, Wang Y, Li X, Ren L, Zhao J, Hu Y et al. Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Lancet. 2020;395(10223):497-506. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30183-5.
Li X, Zai J, Wang X, Li Y. Potential of large "first generation" human-to-human transmission of 2019-nCoV. J Med Virol. 2020 Apr;92(4):448-454. doi: 10.1002/jmv.25693.
Liu Y, Gayle AA, Wilder-Smith A, Rocklöv J. The reproductive number of COVID-19 is higher compared to SARS coronavirus. J Travel Med. 2020 Feb 13. pii: taaa021. doi: 10.1093/jtm/taaa021.
Zhao S, Musa SS, Lin Q, Ran J, Yang G, Wang W et al. Estimating the Unreported Numberof Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Cases in China in the First Half of January 2020: A Data-Driven Modelling Analysis of the Early Outbreak. J Clin Med. 2020 Feb 1;9(2). pii: E388. doi: 10.3390/jcm9020388.
Xu K, Cai H, Shen Y, Ni Q, Chen Y, Hu S et al. Management of corona virus disease-19 (COVID-19): the Zhejiang experience. ZhejiangDa Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2020 Feb 21;49(1):0.
Xia J, Tong J, Liu M, Shen Y, Guo D. Evaluation of coronavirus in tearsand conjunctival secretions of patients with SARS-CoV-2 J Med Virol. 2020 Feb 26. doi: 10.1002/jmv.25725.
http://www.comrc.com.cn/news/html (accessed April 27, 2020)
http://wst.hainan.gov.cn/yqfk/(accessed April 27, 2020)
World Health Organization. Clinical management of severe acute respiratory infection when novel coronavirus (nCoV) infections suspected: interim guidance. Published January 28, 2020. Accessed April 27, 2020.
Chan JF, Yuan S, Kok KH, To KK, Chu H, Yang J et al. A familial cluster of pneumonia associated with the 2019 novel coronavirus indicating person-to-person transmission: a study of a family cluster. Lancet. 2020;395(10223):514-23. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30154-9.
Jin YH, Cai L, Cheng ZS, Cheng H, Deng T, Fan YP et al. A rapid advice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infected pneumonia (standard version). Mil Med Res. 2020;7(1):4. doi:10.1186/s40779-020-0233-6.
Fan E, Brodie D, Slutsky AS. Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Advances in Diagnosis and Treatment JAMA. 2018 Feb 20;319(7):698-710. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.21907.
Metlay JP, Waterer GW, Long AC, Anzueto A, Brozek J, Crothers K et al. Diagnosis and Treatment of Adults with Community-acquired Pneumonia. An Official Clinical Practice Guideline of the American Thoracic Society and Infectious Diseases Society of America. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2019;200(7):e45-e67. doi:10.1164/rccm.201908-1581ST.
http://wst.hainan.gov.cn/swjw/rdzt/yqfk/202001/t20200131_2742298.html (accessed April 26, 2020)
http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/content/2020-01/27/content_5472352.html (accessed April 26, 2020)
Guan WJ, Ni ZY, Hu Y, Liang WH, Ou CQ, He JX et al. Clinical Characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in China. N Engl J Med. 2020. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2002032.
Jiang X, Rayner S, Luo MH. Does SARS-CoV-2 has a long incubation period than SARS and MERS? J Med Virol.2020 Feb doi: 10.1002/jmv.25708.
Chen N, Zhou M, Dong X, Qu J, Gong F, Han Y et al. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 99 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study. Lancet. 2020;395(10223):507-13. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30211-7.
Wang D, Hu B, Hu C, Zhu F, Liu X, Zhang J et al. Clinical Characteristics of 138 Hospitalized Patients With 2019 Novel Coronavirus-Infected Pneumonia in Wuhan, China. JAMA. 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.1585.
Xu XW, Wu XX, Jiang XG, Xu KJ, Ying LJ, Ma CL et al. Clinical findings in a group of patients infected with the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-Cov-2) outside of Wuhan, China: retrospective case series. 2020 Feb 19;368:m606. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m606.
Tang X, Wu C, Li X, Song Y, Yao X, Wu X et al. On the origin and continuing evolution of SARS-CoV-2. National Science Review, nwaa036, https://doi.org/10.1093/nsr/nwaa036 (accessed April 27, 2020)
Kim KH, Tandi TE, Choi JW, Moon JM, Kim MS. Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) outbreak in South Korea, 2015: epidemiology, characteristics and public health implications. J Hosp Infect 2017;95:207-13. doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2016.10.008
Xie X, Zhong Z, Zhao W, Zheng C, Wang F, Liu J. Chest CT for Typical 2019-nCoV Pneumonia: Relationship to Negative RT-PCR Testing. Radiology. 2020 Feb 12:200343. doi: 10.1148/radiol. 2020200343
Gao J, Tian Z, Yang X. Breakthrough: Chloroquine phosphate has shown apparent efficacy in treatmentof COVID-19 associated pneumonia in clinical studies. Biosci Trends. 2020 Feb 19. doi: 10.5582/bst.2020.01047
Zhang Q, Wang Y, Qi C, Shen L, Li J. Clinical trial analysis of 2019-nCoV therapy registered in China. J Med Virol. 2020 Feb 28. doi: 10.1002/jmv.25733.
Li H, Wang YM, Xu JY, Cao B. Potential antiviral therapeutics for 2019 Novel Coronavirus. Zhong Hua Jie He He Hu Xi Za Zhi. 2020 Feb 5;43(0): E002. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1001-0939. 2020.0002.
Wang M, Cao R, Zhang L, Yang X, Liu J, Xu M et al. Remdesivir and chloroquine effectively inhibit the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in vitro. Cell Res. 2020;30(3):269-71. doi:10.1038/s41422-020-0282-0.

Table 1. Demographics and epidemiological characteristics of patients with COVID-19

All patients

(N=91)

Local cases (N=35)

Imported cases

(N=56)

P values

Characteristics

Age, years, Mean (SD)

Range

≤29

30-39

40-49

50-59

60-69

≥70

Sex

Female

Male

Chronic medical illness

Hypertension

Cardiovascular disease

Diabetes

Respiratory system disease

Thyroid disease

Chronic liver disease

Chronic kidney disease

Digestive system disease

Malignant tumor

Other

50 (14)

21-83

6 (6.6%)

20 (22.0%)

15 (16.5%)

25 (27.5%)

19 (20.9%)

6 (6.6%)

39 (42.9%)

52 (57.1%)

31 (34.1%)

12 (13.2%)

5 (5.5%)

7 (7.7%)

2 (2.2%)

5 (5.5%)

3 (3.3%)

2 (2.2%)

1 (1.1%)

6 (6.6%)

46 (12)

21-73

2 (5.7%)

10 (28.6%)

8 (22.9%)

9 (25.7%)

5 (14.3%)

1 (2.9%)

16 (47.2%)

19 (52.8%)

8 (22.9%)

2 (5.7%)

1 (2.9%)

0 (0.0%)

1 (2.9%)

0 (0.0%)

1 (2.9%)

52 (15)

27-83

4 (7.1%)

10 (17.9%)

7 (12.5%)

16 (28.6%)

14 (25.0%)

5 (8.9%)

23 (41.1%)

33 (58.9%)

23 (41.1%)

10 (17.9%)

4 (7.1%)

5 (8.9%)

6 (10.7%)

2 (3.6%)

4 (7.1%)

2 (3.6%)

1 (1.8%)

0 (0.0%)

5 (8.9%)

0.030

0.410

0.670

0.074

0.120

0.645

0.152

0.243

0.521

0.645

1.000

0.385

0.400

Epidemiological survey

Live or travel history in epidemic area*

Time of out of epidemic area to onset, days, n=53, Median (IQR),[range]

Close contacts with COVID-19 patient

Time of contacted COVID-19 patient to onset, days, n=26, Median (IQR) [range]

Cluster outbreak

53 (58.2%)

5 (2-10) [1-34]

42 (46.2%)

26/42; 8(4-13) [1-22]

53 (58.2%)

0 (0.00%)

24 (68.6%)

17/24; 6 (4-15) [1-22]

27 (77.1%)

53 (94.6%)

5 (2-10) [1-34]

18 (32.1%)

9/18; 8 (5-16) [2-20]

26 (46.4%)

<0.001

0.001

0.570

0.004

Data are n (%) unless specified otherwise. N is the total number of patients with available data. ARDS=acute respiratory distress syndrome. COVID-19=coronavirus disease-19. P values for comparing two groups were derived using Fisher’s exact test for categorized variables and t-test for continuous variables.

*Epidemic area refers to Wuhan and other epidemic areas in Hubei Province.

NA, not available.

Table 2. Clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19

All patients

(N=91)

Local cases

(N=35)

Imported cases (N=56)

P values

Illness station

First symptom to, Median (IQR), days

Hospital admission

ARDS

Admission to intensive care unit

Clinical classification

Nonsevere

Severe

5.0 (3.0-9.0)

8.0 (5.5-9.5)

9 (9.9%)

76 (83.5%)

15 (16.5%)

6.0 (2.0-10.0)

N=2, Range 4-6

2 (5.7%)

32 (91.4%)

3 (8.6%)

5.0 (3.0-7.8)

N=7, 9.0 (6.0-10.0)

7 (12.5%)

44 (78.6%)

12 (21.4%)

0.670

0.184

0.291

0.149

Signs and symptoms

Fever

Peak temperature, °C, Median (IQR)

Days of fever, Median (IQR)

Dry cough

Expectoration

Fatigue

Shortness of breath

Myalgia

Diarrhea

Sore throat

Nausea and vomiting

More than one sign or symptom

Fever, cough, and shortness of breath

72 (79.1%)

38.0 (37.5-38.7)

8.0 (4.0-10.0)

72 (79.1%)

36 (39.6%)

35 (38.5%)

27 (29.7%)

11 (12.1%)

13 (14.3%)

10 (11.0%)

7 (7.7%)

87 (95.6%)

23 (25.3%)

21 (60.0%)

37.8 (36.9-38.6)

6.0 (3.0-10.5)

30 (85.7%)

16 (45.7%)

11 (31.4%)

9 (25.7%)

3 (8.6%)

2 (5.7%)

33 (94.3%)

7 (20.0%)

51 (91.1%)

38.0 (37.7-38.7)

8.0 (4.8-10.0)

42 (75.0%)

20 (35.7%)

24 (42.9%)

18 (32.1%)

8 (14.3%)

10 (17.9%)

8 (14.3%)

5 (8.9%)

54 (96.4%)

16 (28.6%)

0.001

0.028

0.506

0.221

0.343

0.276

0.639

0.521

0.218

0.306

0.703

0.637

0.360

Complication

Any

Infection

ARDS

Septic shock

Cardiac insufficiency

Metablic acidosis

Acute renal injury

MODS

14(15.4%)

14 (15.4%)

9 (9.9%)

8 (8.8%)

5 (5.5%)

6 (6.6%)

2 (5.7%)

2 (2.9%)

1 (2.9%)

12 (21.4%)

7 (19.6%)

7 (12.5%)

6 (10.7%)

7 (12.5%)

4 (7.1%)

5 (8.9%)

0.043

0.474

0.706

0.146

0.645

0.400

Data are n (%) unless specified otherwise. N is the total number of patients with available data.

COVID-19=coronavirus disease-19. ARDS=acute respiratory distress syndrome. MODS=multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. P values for comparing two groups were derived using Fisher’s exact test for categorized variables and t-test for continuous variables.

Table 3. Laboratory data and imaging finding of patients with COVID-19

All patients

(N=91)

Local cases

(N=35)

Imported cases (N=56)

P values

Blood routine

White cell count (×10⁹/L), Mean (SD)

>10.0

<4.0

Lymphocytes (×10⁹/L), Mean (SD)

< 1.1

Platelets (×10⁹/L), Mean (SD)

<150

Hemoglobin (g/L), Mean (SD)

5.45 (2.42)

5 (5.5%)

21 (23.1%)

1.26 (0.62)

39 (42.9%)

205.8 (69.9)

23 (25.3%)

133.0 (18.1)

5.57 (1.70)

1 (2.9%)

5 (14.3%)

1.45 (0.59)

8 (22.9%)

239.7 (68.3)

3 (8.3%)

131.7 (17.7)

5.38 (2.79)

4 (7.1%)

16 (28.6%)

1.14 (0.61)

31 (55.4%)

184.6 (62.6)

20 (35.7%)

133.8 (18.5)

0.502

0.645

0.116

0.022

0.002

0.001

0.005

0.412

Blood biochemistry

Alanine aminotransferase (U/L, normal range 3-35), Median (IQR)

Increased (n, %)

Aspartate aminotransferase (U/L, normal range 3-40), Median (IQR)

Increased (n, %)

Total bilirubin (μmol/L, normal range 4.0-17.1), Median (IQR)

Increased (n, %)

Albumin (g/L, normal range 35.0-55.0), Median (IQR)

Decreased (n, %)

PT (sec), Median (IQR)

Serum creatinine (μmol/L), Median (IQR)

Creatine kinase (U/L), Median (IQR)

C-reaction protein (mg/L), Median (IQR) Procalcitonin (ng/mL), Median (IQR)

21.3 (14.7-34.8)

20 (22.0%)

22.0 (17.0-30.1)

12 (13.2%)

9.0 (6.5-13.4)

13 (14.3%)

42.3 (36.2-47.1)

18 (19.8%)

11.3 (10.8-11.8)

65.8 (48.0-76.9)

63.0 (46.0-93.6)

12.3 (2.2-45.1)

0.04 (0.02-0.06)

22.0 (15.0-31.0)

6 (17.1%)

24.0 (20.0-32.0)

4 (11.4%)

9.8 (5.9-13.9)

3 (8.6%)

46.7 (41.4-49.6)

4 (11.4%)

11.3 (10.3-12.4)

68.0 (50.9-77.0)

70.0 (46.0-127.0)

5.3 (1.2-30.5)

0.04 (0.02-0.09)

20.7 (13.8-35.4)

14 (25.0%)

20.0 (15.3-28.0)

8 (14.3%)

8.4 (6.5-11.8)

10 (17.9%)

39.3 (34.7-44.4)

14 (25.0%)

11.4 (10.8-12.5)

59.0 (47.0-76.8)

62.0 (45.0-84.0)

17.0 (3.0-51.3)

0.03 (0.01-0.06)

0.427

0.379

0.170

0.761

0.410

0.218

0.001

0.114

0.407

0.835

0.013

0.022

0.778

Chest CT finding

Unilateral pneumonia

Bilateral pneumonia

Lung periphery

Ground-glass opacity

Multiple Infiltration

Bilateral lung periphery ground-glass opacity

Nodule

Lung consolidation

Pleural effusion

16 (17.6%)

75 (82.4%)

79 (86.8%)

80 (87.9%)

76 (83.5%)

70 (76.9%)

11 (12.1%)

8 (8.8%)

2 (2.2%)

8 (22.9%)

27 (77.1%)

29 (82.9%)

30 (85.7%)

26 (74.3%)

25 (71.4%)

2 (5.7%)

3 (8.6%)

0 (0.0%)

8 (14.3%)

48 (85.7%)

50 (89.3%)

45 (80.4%)

9 (16.1%)

5 (8.9%)

2 (3.6%)

0.296

0.526

0.743

0.061

0.325

0.193

1.000

0.521

Data are n (%) and mean (SD). N is the total number of patients with available data. COVID-19=coronavirus disease-2019. P values for comparing two groups were derived using Fisher’s exact test for categorized variables and t-test for continuous variables.

Table 4. Treatment, virus changes and outcome of patients with COVID-19

All patients

(N=91)

Local cases (N=35)

Imported cases (N=56)

P value

Treatment

Chinese traditional medicine

Antiviral therapy

Oxygen therapy

Intravenous immunoglobulin therapy

Thymosin alpha1

Glucocorticoids

Intravenous antibiotic

Mechanical ventilation

Non-invasive (ie, face mask)

Invasive

ECMO

91 (100.0%)

89 (97.8%)

46 (50.5%)

22 (24.2%)

20 (22.0%)

13 (14.3%)

12 (13.2%)

10 (11.0%)

1 (1.1%)

9 (9.9%)

1 (1.1%)

35 (100.0%)

33 (94.3%)

14 (40.0%)

5 (14.3%)

9 (25.7%)

3 (8.6%)

2 (5.7%)

1 (2.9%)

56 (100.0%)

32 (57.1%)

17 (30.4%)

11 (19.6%)

10 (17.9%)

8 (14.3%)

0 (0.0%)

8 (14.3%)

0 (0.0%)

1.000

0.112

0.306

0.081

0.496

0.218

0.120

0.385

0.145

0.385

0.145

Hospital stay, days, Median (IQR)

14 (11-18)

14 (11-17)

15 (11-14)

0.403

Duration of SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive from onset

Nasopharyngeal swabs, days

Median (IQR), [range]

Faeces, days

Median (IQR), [range]

11 (6-16)

[1-39]

79/91, 13 (10-19)

[1-40]

8 (5-16)

[1-37]

29/35, 13 (6-18)

[1-37]

12 (8-16)

[4-39]

50/56, 13 (10-20)

[4-40]

0.084

0.216

Duration of SARS-CoV-2 shedding from onset

Nasopharyngeal swabs, days

Median (IQR), [range]

Faeces (days)

Median (IQR), [range]

16 (13-23)

[6-43]

79/91, 19 (14-26)

[6-43]

15 (10-22)

[8-37]

29/35, 18 (11-24)

[6-37]

17 (14-23)

[6-43]

50/56, 19 (15-27)

[8-43]

0.148

0.242

Clinical outcome

Discharged

Died

88 (96.7%)

3 (3.3%)

34 (97.1%)

1 (1.1%)

54 (96.4%)

2 (3.6%)

1.000

Data are n (%) and mean (SD). N is the total number of patients with available data. COVID-19=coronavirus disease-2019. SARS-CoV-2=severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. ECMO=extracorporeal membrance oxygenation. NA, not available. P values for comparing two groups were derived using Fisher’s exact test for categorized variables and t-test for continuous variables.

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Epidemiological and clinical features of imported and local patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Hainan, China

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

abbreviations

Declarations

References

Tables

Status:

Version 1