ABSTRACT
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been spreading like a wildfire everywhere in the globe. It has been challenging the global health care system ever since the end of 2019, with its virulence and pathogenicity. Recent studies have shown the association between ABO blood group, Rhesus blood type and susceptibility to COVID-19 infection. Various studies and few meta-analyses have been done and some might be inconsistent; therefore, this meta-analysis was done to assess the relationship between different ABO and Rhesus blood types on the susceptibility to COVID-19 infections. This meta-analysis assessed the odds ratio of COVID-19 infection of different ABO and Rhesus blood types. Subgroup analyses according to (1) age and gender matched; (2) different blood group antigens; (3) Rhesus positive and negative of each blood group were carried out. Publication bias and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) were also done to assess the risk of bias in these publications. It was found that blood group A showed significant difference in odds ratio of COVID-19 infection (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.08-1.24). Blood group AB showed significant difference in odds ratio when studies with lower QUADAS-2 score were removed. This means that populations with blood group A and AB are more likely to be infected with COVID-19. As there is a higher tendency that blood group A and AB to be infected with COVID- 19, precautious care should be taken by these populations.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , ABO Blood-Group System , Humans , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This study aimed at determining the effectiveness of an innovative approach using interprofessional simulation scenarios (IPSS) in improving knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) of hospital-acquired infection control (HAIC) among health professionals. METHODS: The interventional study was conducted in a teaching hospital in Malaysia. Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants from surgical, intensive care, and other units. Thirty-six health professionals in the experimental and forty in the control group completed the study. All subjects participated in an interactive lecture and demonstrated four IPSS on HAIC i.e. (i) taking blood specimen (ii) bedsore dressing (iii) collecting sputum for acid-fast bacilli and (iv) intermittent bladder catheterization. Each team consisted of a doctor and a nurse. A self-administered questionnaire on KAP on HAIC was completed by respondents during the pre-, immediately and, post-intervention. An independent t-test was conducted to measure the significance between the experimental and control group. RESULTS: The mean scores for KAP among the experimental group increased following the intervention. Significant differences in scores were seen between the two groups post-intervention (p < 0.05). Overall, using the four procedures as surrogates, the interprofessional learning approach in HAIC intervention showed improvement among the participants in the experimental group following structured instructions. The IPSS approach in HAIC clearly shows its relevance in improving learning outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Well-designed interprofessional simulated scenarios can be effective in skills training in improving KAP in HAIC among health professionals.