Clinical and laboratory profile and outcomes of hospitalized COVID‐19 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Ghana – A single‐center study

BACKGROUND: In sub‐Saharan Africa and particularly in Ghana, there is scarcity of published literature specifically on the impact of DM on outcomes in COVID‐19 patients. Based on the difference in genetic makeup and demographic patterns in Africans compared to the Western world and with the rising burden of DM and other non‐communicable diseases in Ghana there is a need to define the impact DM has on persons with COVID‐19. This would ensure adequate risk stratification and surveillance for such patients as well as appropriate scale up of therapeutic management if needed. AIMS: This single‐center study describes the clinical and laboratory profile and outcomes of COVID‐19 in‐patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) in Ghana. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis was undertaken of the medical records of adults with COVID‐19 hospitalized at a facility in Ghana from March to October 2020. Clinical, laboratory and radiological data and outcomes were analysed. Comparisons between COVID‐19 patients with DM and non‐diabetics were done with an independent t‐test or a Mann–Whitney test when normality was not attained. Odds ratios (95% CI) were calculated using univariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Out of 175 COVID‐19 patients, 64 (36.6%) had DM. Overall mean age was 55.9 ± 18.3 years; DM patients were older compared to non‐diabetics (61.1 ± 12.8 vs. 53.0 ± 20.2 years, p = .049). Compared to non‐diabetics, diabetics were more likely to have higher blood glucose at presentation, have hypertension, be on angiotensin 2 receptor blockers [OR, 95% CI 3.3 (1.6–6.7)] and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors [OR, 95% CI 3.1 (1.3–7.4)]; and be HIV negative (p < .05). Although the values were normal, diabetics had a higher platelet count but decreased lymphocytes, aspartate transaminase and alkaline phosphatase compared to non‐diabetics (p < .05). There was no difference in clinical symptoms, severity or mortality between the two groups. DISCUSSION: The clinical profile of patients studied are similar to prior studies. However the outcome of this study showed that DM was not associated with worse clinical severity and in‐hospital mortality. This could have been due to majority of DM patients in this study having relatively good blood glucose control on admission. Secondly, DM alone may not be a risk factor for mortality. Rather its concurrent existence with multiple co‐morbidities (especially cardiovascular co‐morbidities which may predispose to pro‐inflammatory and pro‐thrombotic states) may be driving the rise in severity and mortality risks reported in other studies. Furthermore, this study was conducted among an African population and Africa has been shown to be generally less severely hit by the COVID‐19 pandemic compared to other regions outside the continent. This has been postulated to be due, among other factors, to inherent protective mechanisms in Africans due to early and repeated exposure to parasitic and other organisms resulting in a robust innate immunity. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggested that DM was not associated with more severe clinical symptoms or worse outcomes among hospitalized COVID‐19 patients. Despite this, it is important that DM patients adhere to their therapy, observe the COVID‐19 containment protocols and are prioritized in the administration of the COVID‐19 vaccines. STUDY HIGHLIGHTS: In this retrospective, single‐centre study on the clinical and laboratory profile and outcome of hospitalized DM patients with COVID‐19, patients with DM did not have a more severe clinical profile or worse outcomes. They were, however, significantly older, more likely to have higher admission blood glucose, have hypertension, be on angiotensin 2 receptor blockers and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors; and be HIV negative compared to the cohort without DM. DM patients should be a priority group for the COVID‐19 vaccines.