ABSTRACT
Objective The successful response to COVID-19 would require an effective public health surveillance and management, technical expertise, and smart mobilization of many resources. This study aimed to analyze COVID-19 epidemiological profile with respect to the changing case definitions and testing performance. Methods Data were extracted from the electronic notification system (Tarassud) from 1 January to 13 July 2020. The information used was primarily composed of details regarding samples, age, sex, nationality, residence and hospital admission. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were used to determine the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results A total of 20,377 COVID-19 tests were performed from 15 March to 13 July 2020. Most (4885;87.2%) positive tests were among Omanis, and 3602 (64.3%) were in males. The median age of people tested was 30 (standard deviation 16.5) years (interquartile range 22, 38). The odds of acquiring infection increased with age. The ORs of infection for groups of 30–39, 40–49 and over 50 years of age were 2.75 (95% CI 2.42–3.13), 3.29 (95% CI 2.85–3.79) and 3.34 (95% CI 2.89–3.87), respectively. Likewise, admission rates increased with age;the ORs for the groups 40–49 and ≥ 50 years of age were 4.45 (95% CI1.35–14.67) and 16.53 (95% CI 5.18–52.75), respectively. Multivariate analysis identified Barka 1.4 (95% CI 1.33–2.27) and Al Musanaah 1.4 (95% CI 1.07–1.84) as having the highest risk of transmission. Of 5604 people with positive results, 160 (2.9%) required hospital admission, and males had higher odds of admission, with an OR of 1.5 (95% CI 1.05–2.13). The average delay in the release of test results further increased after the fourth and fifth case definitions were adopted (2.04 and 2.56 days, respectively). Conclusion Age was a significant factor associated with infection and hospital admission. Transmission occurred mainly among Omanis, and Barka and Al Musanaah reported the highest rates of transmission. Prioritization of testing accessibility should continually be assessed for high-risk groups, particularly when resources become limited.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundThe changing epidemiological profile of the COVID-19 pandemic and the uncertain clinical picture of patients characterise this ongoing and most challenging health event.ObjectivesTo report clinical features, laboratory characteristics, and mortality risk factors among COVID-19 patients admitted to a secondary hospital in Oman.MethodsA retrospective study for the first 455 patients admitted with COVID-19 to Rustaq hospital from 12th April, 2020 to 27th September, 2020. A predesigned questionnaire collected data from the hospital medical electronic system.ResultsThe mean age was 42.84 (SD = 19.86) years, and the majority of patients were aged 30 to 59 and 60 or above;207 (45.5%) and 189 (41.5%), respectively. Male patients constituted approximately two-thirds of the subjects. Fever, dyspnea and cough were the most common presenting symptoms (69%, 66%, and 62%, respectively), while comorbidities with diabetes mellitus and hypertension were 47% and 44%, respectively. Bacterial growth was identified at approximately 10%. Bivariate analysis turned out to be significant with a number of factors. However, multivariate analysis showed significance with patients aged over 60 (OR = 7.15, 95% CI 1.99–25.63), dyspnea (OR = 2.83, 95% CI 1.5–5.33), dyslipidemia (OR = 1.93, 95% CI 1.02–3.66) and being bed-ridden (OR = 5.01, 95% CI 1.73–14.44). Durations from onset of symptoms to admission and respiratory distress were lower among patients who died;p = 0.024 and p = 0.001, respectively. Urea, Troponin and LDH may act as potential diagnostic biomarkers for severity or mortality.ConclusionsThis study identified groups of patients with a higher risk of mortality, with severe disturbance in the laboratory markers while some could act as potential diagnostic biomarkers.
ABSTRACT
Background: Covid-19 pandemic has left deep psychological impacts, especially among infected patients. It is extremely important to understand the extent of those effects, while improving the compliance with isolation measures at the same time. Objectives: To detect prevalence of stress using two psychological scales and examine the stress associated factors, also to identify self-isolation compliance rates among COVID-19 patients. Methods: Cross-sectional research was conducted from 15 November to 22 December 2020, involving 379 patient participants selected via systematic random sampling. Kessler 10 Psychological Distress (K10) and the impact of event scale-revised (IES-R) tests were used to ascertain the levels of distress. Results: K10 measure revealed elevated stress amongst 121 (31.9%) of participants, whereas IES_R indicated the level was 37.7%. Using the K10 indicated the multivariate analysis was significant for females (OR = 2.482, 95% CI: 1.532-4.021), patients with financial problems (OR = 2.332, 95% CI: 1.270-4.282) and patients experiencing shortages of essentials (OR = 4.920, 95% CI: 2.524-9.590). The IES-R scale indicated that only female and patients experiencing shortages scored significantly in multivariate analysis, (OR = 1.895, 95% CI: 1.1223-2.935) and (OR = 2.928, 95% CI: 1.1580-5.424), respectively. Those undergoing shorter isolation periods reported lower levels of stress on both K10, p=0.016 and IES-R, p=0.002. Approximately 90% of patients used their own towels during isolation. Moreover, 80.2% slept in separate rooms and 74% used masks in the presence of other family members. Essential supply shortages were reported by 14.2% of respondents. Conclusions: Self-compliance rates were not optimal, while psychological distress was more prevalent among some groups. Intervention is imperative to minimize stress and improve self-isolation compliance.