Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32494921›Full record

ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2020

31 days of COVID-19-cardiac events during restriction of public life-a comparative study.

Manuel Rattka, Michael Baumhardt, Jens Dreyhaupt, Dietrich Rothenbacher, Kevin Thiessen, Sinisa Markovic, Wolfgang Rottbauer, Armin Imhof

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on acute coronary syndromes in Germany during the first wave: the COVID-19 collateral damage study.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2023
    Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Manuel RattkaClinic for Internal Medicine II, University Hospital Ulm-Medical Center, Albert Einstein Allee 23, 89081, Ulm, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3269-3871
Michael BaumhardtClinic for Internal Medicine II, University Hospital Ulm-Medical Center, Albert Einstein Allee 23, 89081, Ulm, Germany.
Jens DreyhauptInstitute of Epidemiology and Medical Biometry, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
Dietrich RothenbacherInstitute of Epidemiology and Medical Biometry, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
Kevin ThiessenClinic for Internal Medicine II, University Hospital Ulm-Medical Center, Albert Einstein Allee 23, 89081, Ulm, Germany.
Sinisa MarkovicClinic for Internal Medicine II, University Hospital Ulm-Medical Center, Albert Einstein Allee 23, 89081, Ulm, Germany.
Wolfgang RottbauerClinic for Internal Medicine II, University Hospital Ulm-Medical Center, Albert Einstein Allee 23, 89081, Ulm, Germany.
Armin ImhofClinic for Internal Medicine II, University Hospital Ulm-Medical Center, Albert Einstein Allee 23, 89081, Ulm, Germany. armin.imhof@uniklinik-ulm.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7452-303X
University Hospital Ulm · DEUniversität Ulm · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThe coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 outbreak led to the most recent pandemic of the twenty-first century. To contain spread of the virus, many nations introduced a public lockdown. How the pandemic itself and measures of social restriction affect hospital admissions due to acute cardiac events has rarely been evaluated yet. METHODS AND

resultsGerman public authorities announced measures of social restriction between March 21st and April 20th, 2020. During this period, all patients suffering from an acute cardiac event admitted to our hospital (N = 94) were assessed and incidence rate ratios (IRR) of admissions for acute cardiac events estimated, and compared with those during the same period in the previous three years (2017-2019, N = 361). Admissions due to cardiac events were reduced by 22% as compared to the previous years (n = 94 vs. an average of n = 120 per year for 2017-2019). Whereas IRR for STEMI 1.20 (95% CI 0.67-2.14) and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest IRR 0.82 (95% CI 0.33-2.02) remained similar, overall admissions with an IRR of 0.78 (95% CI 0.62-0.98) and IRR for NSTEMI with 0.46 (95% CI 0.27-0.78) were significantly lower. In STEMI patients, plasma concentrations of high-sensitivity troponin T at admission were significantly higher (644 ng/l, IQR 372-2388) compared to 2017-2019 (195 ng/l, IQR 84-1134; p = 0.02).

conclusionThe SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and concomitant social restrictions are associated with reduced cardiac events admissions to our tertiary care center. From a public health perspective, strategies have to be developed to assure patients are seeking and getting medical care and treatment in time during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Indexed as

Patient Acceptance of Health CareSocial IsolationAgedAged, 80 and overCOVID-19FemaleGermanyHealth Services AccessibilityHealth Services Needs and DemandHeart DiseasesHumansInfection ControlMaleMiddle AgedNeeds AssessmentPatient AdmissionAcute coronary syndromeCardiac eventsCOVID-19Epidemiology

Identifiers

PMID32494921
PMCPMC7268583
OpenAlexW3032567616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.