The evidence from clinical trials on Gout medicines effect on COVID-19: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: To evaluate the available evidence from clinical trials on the efficacy of gout medicines against COVID-19. DESIGN: Systematic review and Meta-analysis. METHODS: We are systematically searching five databases [PubMed, Embase, CT.gov, ICTRP, CINAHL (EBSCO)]. We are following the PRISMA statement and the EPOC guidelines. The meta-analysis will be conducted using Revman-5.4.1 from Cochrane collaboration, UK. This review's protocol was also registered in PROSPERO, University of York, UK (CRD42022299718). RESULTS: In this meta-analysis, we plan to give a conclusive overview of the available evidence on the efficacy of the medications used to manage gout in reducing COVID-19 mortality, ICU admission, ventilation rate and hospitalization duration. If the results were positive, these drugs would greatly add to the scarce treatment options against COVID-19. Furthermore, these drugs might provide an excellent alternative to inconvenient and expensive drugs. Additionally, most of these drugs have a well-established safety profile for use during nursing, making them a much safer option for nursing mothers with COVID-19.

The Management of Myocardial Injury Related to SARS-CoV-2 Pneumonia.

The global evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is known to all. The diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia is expected to worsen, and mortality will be higher when combined with myocardial injury (MI). The combination of novel coronavirus infections in patients with MI can cause confusion in diagnosis and assessment, with each condition exacerbating the other, and increasing the complexity and difficulty of treatment. It would be a formidable challenge for clinical practice to deal with this situation. Therefore, this review aims to gather literature on the progress in managing MI related to SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. This article reviews the definition, pathogenesis, clinical evaluation, management, and treatment plan for MI related to SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia based on the most recent literature, diagnosis, and treatment trial reports. Many studies have shown that early diagnosis and implementation of targeted treatment measures according to the different stages of disease can reduce the mortality rate among patients with MI related to SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. The reviewed studies show that multiple strategies have been adopted for the management of MI related to COVID-19. Clinicians should closely monitor SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia patients with MI, as their condition can rapidly deteriorate and progress to heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, and/or cardiogenic shock. In addition, appropriate measures need to be implemented in the diagnosis and treatment to provide reasonable care to the patient.

The evidence from clinical trials on colchicine and corticosteroids' effect on COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: With no clear end for the outbreak, identifying the drugs that are effective in COVID-19's management is of utmost importance to reduce the impact on the general population and the healthcare systems. METHODS: This is a systematic review and a meta-analysis evaluating the evidence from clinical trials on the effect of colchicine and corticosteroids against COVID-19. In this review, we have systematically searched five databases [(PubMed, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, ICTRP, CINAHL (EBSCO)]. Cochrane's data extraction sheet was used to collect the required information, and RevMan-5.4.1 was used to conduct the meta-analysis and to assess the risk of bias. The review was registered in Prospero (CRD42022299718). RESULTS: The total number of included studies was 17, with 18,956 participants; the majority were male 12,001. Out of which, 8772 participants were on colchicine, 569 took methylprednisolone, and 64 patients received prednisolone. The meta-analysis has shown that colchicine had no significant effect on reducing the mortality rate among COVID-19 patients [OR 0.98(95% CI 0.90-1.08), p = .70), I2:1%)], corticosteroids have significantly reduced the mortality rates [OR 0.55 (95% CI 0.33-0.91), p = .02, I2:40]. Colchicine did not reduce the incidence of ICU admissions [OR 0.74 (95% CI 0.39-1.40), p = .35, I2:0%], while steroidal drugs significantly reduced the ICU admissions [OR 0.42 (95% CI 0.23-0.78), p = .005, I2:0%]. Unlike steroidal drugs [OR 0.53 (95% CI 0.30-0.95), p = .03, I2:61%], colchicine failed to reduce the need for mechanical ventilation [OR 0.73 (95% CI 0.48-1.10), p = .13, I2:76%]. Steroidal drugs significantly reduced the duration of hospitalization among COVID-19 patients [OR -0.50 (95% CI -0.79-0.21), p = .0007, I2:36%]. CONCLUSIONS: The use of colchicine did not significantly reduce the mortality rate, ICU admissions, and mechanical ventilation among COVID-19 patients. Conversely, corticosteroids significantly reduced the mortality rate, ICU admissions, mechanical ventilation, and hospitalization duration among COVID-19 patients.

Misinformation, perceptions towards COVID-19 and willingness to be vaccinated: A population-based survey in Yemen.

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, many pharmaceutical companies have been racing to develop a safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine. Simultaneously, rumors and misinformation about COVID-19 are still widely spreading. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the prevalence of COVID-19 misinformation among the Yemeni population and its association with vaccine acceptance and perceptions. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in four major cities in Yemen. The constructed questionnaire consisted of four main sections (sociodemographic data, misinformation, perceptions (perceived susceptibility, severity, and worry), and vaccination acceptance evaluation). Subject recruitment and data collection were conducted online utilizing social websites and using the snowball sampling technique. Descriptive and inferential analyses were performed using SPSS version 27. RESULTS: The total number of respondents was 484. Over 60% of them were males and had a university education. More than half had less than 100$ monthly income and were khat chewers, while only 18% were smokers. Misinformation prevalence ranged from 8.9% to 38.9%, depending on the statement being asked. Men, university education, higher income, employment, and living in urban areas were associated with a lower misinformation level (p <0.05). Statistically significant association (p <0.05) between university education, living in urban areas, and being employed with perceived susceptibility were observed. The acceptance rate was 61.2% for free vaccines, but it decreased to 43% if they had to purchase it. Females, respondents with lower monthly income, and those who believed that pharmaceutical companies made the virus for financial gains were more likely to reject the vaccination (p <0.05). CONCLUSION: The study revealed that the acceptance rate to take a vaccine was suboptimal and significantly affected by gender, misinformation, cost, and income. Furthermore, being female, non-university educated, low-income, and living in rural areas were associated with higher susceptibility to misinformation about COVID-19. These findings show a clear link between misinformation susceptibility and willingness to vaccinate. Focused awareness campaigns to decrease misinformation and emphasize the vaccination's safety and efficacy might be fundamental before initiating any mass vaccination in Yemen.

Healthcare workers' knowledge, preparedness, counselling practices, and perceived barriers to confront COVID-19: A cross-sectional study from a war-torn country, Yemen.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) represents a difficult challenge and could have devastating consequences for the healthcare system and healthcare workers in war-torn countries with poor healthcare facilities such as Yemen. Our study aimed to evaluate the knowledge, preparedness, counselling practices of healthcare workers regarding COVID-19, and the perceived barriers to adequately prevent and control COVID-19 in Yemen. METHODS: Healthcare workers (HCWs) from major healthcare facilities participated in this cross-sectional study. A self-administered questionnaire comprising of five main domains (demographics, knowledge, self-preparedness, counselling practice, perceived barriers) was distributed among HCWs after obtaining informed consent. A convenient sampling technique was used. Descriptive and inferential analyses were applied using SPSS software. RESULTS: A total of 1000 participants were initially targeted to participate in the study with 514 (51.4%) responding, of which 55.3% were female. Physicians and nurses constituted the largest proportion of participants, with 39.5% and 33.3%, respectively. The median scores for knowledge, self-preparedness, and counselling practice were 8 (out of 9), 9 (out of 15), and 25 (out of 30), respectively. The physician group showed a statistically significant association with better knowledge compared to the nurse group only, P<0.001. Males had higher preparedness scores than females, p<0.001. Also, the intensive care unit (ICU) and emergency departments presented a statistically significant difference by which the participants from these departments were more prepared compared to the others (e.g. outpatients, paediatrics and surgery) with P < 0.0001. The lack of awareness among the general population about COVID-19 preventive measures was perceived as the most common barrier for the adequate prevention and control of COVID-19 in Yemen (89.1%). CONCLUSION: The major highlight of this study is that HCWs have, overall, good knowledge, suboptimal preparedness, and adequate counselling practices prior to the outbreak of COVID-19 in Yemen, despite the high number of perceived barriers. However, urgent action and interventions are needed to improve the preparedness of HCWs to manage COVID-19. The perceived barriers also need to be fully addressed by the local healthcare authorities and international organisations working in Yemen for adequate prevention and control measures to be in place in managing COVID-19.