The Association Between Inhaled Corticosteroid and the Risks of SARS-COV-2 infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background The effect of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) on the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) infection is unclear. Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies that assessed the association between the use of ICS and the risk of SARS-COV-2 infection. PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar were searched to January 1st, 2023. ROBINS-I was used to assess risk of bias of included studies. The outcome of interest was the risk of SARS-COV-2 infection in patients and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated using Comprehensive Meta-analysis software version 3. Results Twelve studies involving seven observational cohort studies, three case-control studies, and two cross-sectional studies were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, compared to non-ICS use, the pooled odds ratio (OR) of the risk of SARS-COV-2 infection was 0.997 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.664-1.499;p=0.987) for patients with ICS use. Subgroup analyses demonstrated no statistical significance in the increased risk of SARS-COV-2 infection in patients with ICS monotherapy or in combination with bronchodilators (pooled OR=1.408;95% CI=0.693-2.858;p=0.344 in ICS monotherapy, and pooled OR=1.225;95% CI=0.533-2.815;p=0.633 in ICS combination, respectively). In addition, no significant association was observed between ICS use and the risk of SARS-COV-2 infection for patients with COPD (pooled OR=0.715;95% CI=0.415-1.230;p=0.225) and asthma (pooled OR=1.081;95% CI=0.970-1.206;p=0.160). Conclusions The use of ICS, either monotherapy or in combination with bronchodilators, does not have impact on the risk of SARS-COV-2 infection. Data availability The datasets used and analysed in the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Differences in the characteristics and patterns of adult emergency department return visits before and after the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak

Background Data about changes in the characteristics of ED return visits before and after the COVID-19 outbreak are limited. This study aimed to report the differences on utility in ED return visits after the COVID-19 outbreak. Methods This retrospective cohort study was conducted from 2019 to 2020. Adult patients with ED return visits were included in the analysis. Variables including demographic characteristics, pre-comorbidities, triage levels, vital signs, chief complaints, management, and diagnosis were recorded and confirmed via a manual assessment. Results The proportion of patients with ED visits decreased by 23%. Hence, that of patients with ED return visits also reduced from 2580 to 2020 patients (22%) after the COVID-19 outbreak. The average age (60–57.8 years) of patients with return visits was significantly younger, and the proportion of female patients decreased remarkably. Further, the proportion of patients with chronic pre-existing diseases at the return visit significantly differed after the COVID-19 outbreak. The proportion of patients with chief complaints including dizziness, dyspnea, cough, vomiting, diarrhea, and chills during the return visits significantly differed before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. In the multivariable logistic regression model, age, high triage level were significantly associated with unfavorable outcome return visit. Conclusions The use of services in the ED has changed since the COVID-19 outbreak. Hence, the proportion of patients with unplanned return visits within 72 h decreased. After the COVID-19 outbreak, people are now cautious whether they should return to the ED, as in the pre-pandemic situation, or just treat conservatively at home.

Characteristics of patients with SARS-COV-2 PCR re-positivity after recovering from COVID-19.

The purpose of this study was to analyse the clinical characteristics of patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) PCR re-positivity after recovering from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Patients (n = 1391) from Guangzhou, China, who had recovered from COVID-19 were recruited between 7 September 2021 and 11 March 2022. Data on epidemiology, symptoms, laboratory test results and treatment were analysed. In this study, 42.7% of recovered patients had re-positive result. Most re-positive patients were asymptomatic, did not have severe comorbidities, and were not contagious. The re-positivity rate was 39%, 46%, 11% and 25% in patients who had received inactivated, mRNA, adenovirus vector and recombinant subunit vaccines, respectively. Seven independent risk factors for testing re-positive were identified, and a predictive model was constructed using these variables. The predictors of re-positivity were COVID-19 vaccination status, previous SARs-CoV-12 infection prior to the most recent episode, renal function, SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM antibody levels and white blood cell count. The predictive model could benefit the control of the spread of COVID-19.

The association between inhaled corticosteroid and the risks of SARS-COV-2 infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The effect of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) on the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) infection is unclear. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies that assessed the association between the use of ICS and the risk of SARS-COV-2 infection. PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar were searched to January 1st, 2023. ROBINS-I was used to assess risk of bias of included studies. The outcome of interest was the risk of SARS-COV-2 infection in patients and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated using Comprehensive Meta-analysis software version 3. RESULTS: Twelve studies involving seven observational cohort studies, three case-control studies, and two cross-sectional studies were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, compared to non-ICS use, the pooled odds ratio (OR) of the risk of SARS-COV-2 infection was 0.997 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.664-1.499; p = 0.987) for patients with ICS use. Subgroup analyses demonstrated no statistical significance in the increased risk of SARS-COV-2 infection in patients with ICS monotherapy or in combination with bronchodilators (pooled OR=1.408; 95% CI=0.693-2.858; p = 0.344 in ICS monotherapy, and pooled OR=1.225; 95% CI=0.533-2.815; p = 0.633 in ICS combination, respectively). In addition, no significant association was observed between ICS use and the risk of SARS-COV-2 infection for patients with COPD (pooled OR=0.715; 95% CI=0.415-1.230; p = 0.225) and asthma (pooled OR=1.081; 95% CI=0.970-1.206; p = 0.160). CONCLUSIONS: The use of ICS, either monotherapy or in combination with bronchodilators, does not have impact on the risk of SARS-COV-2 infection.

Differences in the characteristics and patterns of adult emergency department return visits before and after the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak.

BACKGROUND: Data about changes in the characteristics of ED return visits before and after the COVID-19 outbreak are limited. This study aimed to report the differences on utility in ED return visits after the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted from 2019 to 2020. Adult patients with ED return visits were included in the analysis. Variables including demographic characteristics, pre-comorbidities, triage levels, vital signs, chief complaints, management, and diagnosis were recorded and confirmed via a manual assessment. RESULTS: The proportion of patients with ED visits decreased by 23%. Hence, that of patients with ED return visits also reduced from 2580 to 2020 patients (22%) after the COVID-19 outbreak. The average age (60-57.8 years) of patients with return visits was significantly younger, and the proportion of female patients decreased remarkably. Further, the proportion of patients with chronic pre-existing diseases at the return visit significantly differed after the COVID-19 outbreak. The proportion of patients with chief complaints including dizziness, dyspnea, cough, vomiting, diarrhea, and chills during the return visits significantly differed before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. In the multivariable logistic regression model, age, high triage level were significantly associated with unfavorable outcome return visit. CONCLUSIONS: The use of services in the ED has changed since the COVID-19 outbreak. Hence, the proportion of patients with unplanned return visits within 72 h decreased. After the COVID-19 outbreak, people are now cautious whether they should return to the ED, as in the pre-pandemic situation, or just treat conservatively at home.

Maintaining Quality of Life during the Pandemic: Managing Economic, Social, and Health Well-Being Amid the COVID-19 Crisis of Agricultural Entrepreneurs

Every sphere of life is being impacted by COVID-19, but little is known about how the pandemic is affecting agricultural entrepreneurs' quality of life in developing nations. Therefore, this study examined how COVID-19 affected agricultural entrepreneurs' quality of life by utilizing the data collected from 220 females and 1501 males through multistage purposive and random sampling methods. The dataset was analyzed using ordered logistic regression and principal component analysis. The study results indicated that female agricultural entrepreneurs' quality of life was more adversely affected than that of male agricultural entrepreneurs during COVID-19. The findings also showed that male and female agricultural entrepreneurs with a lower socioeconomic status were more severely impacted than male and female agricultural entrepreneurs with a higher socioeconomic status. More female agricultural entrepreneurs compared to males reported that the pandemic had a negative impact on their mental health. More than two-thirds of both male and female agricultural entrepreneurs reported that the pandemic had a negative impact on their ability to purchase both food and non-food items. Similar to this, a sizable majority of people of both sexes stated that COVID-19 had an impact on their ability to access medical facilities. The results also showed that COVID-19 had a greater impact on married agricultural entrepreneurs' quality of life than on single people. Therefore, a paradigm shift in agricultural policy is required for the pandemic response to account for COVID-19's various effects on different genders and socioeconomic groups in rural areas.

Research progress of origin traceability technology for food and drug homologous products

The idea of 'food and drug homology' plays a very important role in Chinese history. Especially, in the COVID-19 epidemic situation, 'food and drug homology' products improved health as medicated diet, thus promoting traditional Chinese drugs industry becomingmoreinternational. However, the quality of food and drug homology products were uneven, intermingled quality products and fake ones happen occasionally. In recent years, traceability technology for food and drug homologous products has gradually become a research hotspot due to the complex and diverse means of adulteration of food and drug homologous products. The aim of the development of origin traceability technology is to protect the 'genuineness' and 'distinctiveness' of food and drug homologous products. At the same time, it protects the rights and interests of consumersand protects the authenticity of food and drug homologous products and the healthy development of the food and drug homologous industry. Based on the basic data of journals and master's and doctoral dissertations collected from CNKI, Web of Sciences and Pud Med till June 2021, this paper analyzed the development trend of traceability technology in the application of global food and drug homologous products. The source, classification, origin traceability technology and application progress in food and drug homologous products were summarized in order to provide a theoretical basis for future research on origin traceability technology for food and drug homologous products.

A Robust Design-Based Expert System for Feature Selection and COVID-19 Pandemic Prediction in Japan.

Expert systems are frequently used to make predictions in various areas. However, the practical robustness of expert systems is not as good as expected, mainly due to the fact that finding an ideal system configuration from a specific dataset is a challenging task. Therefore, how to optimize an expert system has become an important issue of research. In this paper, a new method called the robust design-based expert system is proposed to bridge this gap. The technical process of this system consists of data initialization, configuration generation, a genetic algorithm (GA) framework for feature selection, and a robust mechanism that helps the system find a configuration with the highest robustness. The system will finally obtain a set of features, which can be used to predict a pandemic based on given data. The robust mechanism can increase the efficiency of the system. The configuration for training is optimized by means of a genetic algorithm (GA) and the Taguchi method. The effectiveness of the proposed system in predicting epidemic trends is examined using a real COVID-19 dataset from Japan. For this dataset, the average prediction accuracy was 60%. Additionally, 10 representative features were also selected, resulting in a selection rate of 67% with a reduction rate of 33%. The critical features for predicting the epidemic trend of COVID-19 were also obtained, including new confirmed cases, ICU patients, people vaccinated, population, population density, hospital beds per thousand, middle age, aged 70 or older, and GDP per capital. The main contribution of this paper is two-fold: Firstly, this paper has bridged the gap between the pandemic research and expert systems with robust predictive performance. Secondly, this paper proposes a feature selection method for extracting representative variables and predicting the epidemic trend of a pandemic disease. The prediction results indicate that the system is valuable to healthcare authorities and can help governments get hold of the epidemic trend and strategize their use of healthcare resources.

Antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 S1-RBD cross-react with dengue virus and hinder dengue pathogenesis.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread globally since December 2019. Several studies reported that SARS-CoV-2 infections may produce false-positive reactions in dengue virus (DENV) serology tests and vice versa. However, it remains unclear whether SARS-CoV-2 and DENV cross-reactive antibodies provide cross-protection against each disease or promote disease severity. In this study, we confirmed that antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and its receptor-binding domain (S1-RBD) were significantly increased in dengue patients compared to normal controls. In addition, anti-S1-RBD IgG purified from S1-RBD hyperimmune rabbit sera could cross-react with both DENV envelope protein (E) and nonstructural protein 1 (NS1). The potential epitopes of DENV E and NS1 recognized by these antibodies were identified by a phage-displayed random peptide library. In addition, DENV infection and DENV NS1-induced endothelial hyperpermeability in vitro were inhibited in the presence of anti-S1-RBD IgG. Passive transfer anti-S1-RBD IgG into mice also reduced prolonged bleeding time and decreased NS1 seral level in DENV-infected mice. Lastly, COVID-19 patients' sera showed neutralizing ability against dengue infection in vitro. Thus, our results suggest that the antigenic cross-reactivity between the SARS-CoV-2 S1-RBD and DENV can induce the production of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1-RBD antibodies that cross-react with DENV which may hinder dengue pathogenesis.

Using a telemedicine-assisted airway model to improve the communication and teamwork of tracheal intubation during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Isolated spaces impair communication and teamwork during tracheal intubation (TI) in suspected coronavirus disease 2019 patients. We thus aimed to evaluate the telemedicine-assisted airway model (TAM) to improve communication and teamwork during the pandemic. METHODS: This two-stage prospective study included adult patients intubated in the emergency department of the National Taiwan University Hospital between 1 August 2020 and 31 July 2021. First, we randomised patients receiving TI in the standard setting into the conventional group (Con-G) and the isolation area into the isolation group (Iso-G). We evaluated the obstacles to communication and teamwork in an isolation scenario. Second, we developed the TAM to facilitate communication and teamwork between staff in separate spaces during TI and assigned patients to the TAM group (TAM-G). Communication and teamwork were evaluated using the Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM). Subjective evaluations were conducted using a questionnaire administered to medical staff. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were enrolled: 17, 34, and 38 in the Con-G, Iso-G, and TAM-G, respectively. The communication frequency (CF) of the Con-G and Iso-G was the highest and lowest, respectively. The CF of the TAM-G increased and approached that of the Con-G. The overall TEAM score was the highest in the Con-G and the lowest in the Iso-G, while the overall score in the TAM-G was comparable to that of the Con-G. DISCUSSION: The TAM may improve communication and teamwork for TIs without compromising efficacy during the pandemic. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov; registration numbers: NCT04479332 and NCT04591873.

The Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Anti-Viral Agents for Non-Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

This network meta-analysis compared the clinical efficacy and safety of anti-viral agents for the prevention of disease progression among non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched from their inception to 28 May 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the clinical efficacy of anti-viral agents for non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were included. Three RCTs involving 4241 patients were included. Overall, anti-viral agents were associated with a significantly lower risk of COVID-19 related hospitalization or death compared with the placebo (OR, 0.23; 95% CI: 0.06-0.96; p = 0.04). Compared with the placebo, patients receiving nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir had the lowest risk of hospitalization or death (OR, 0.12; 95% CI: 0.06-0.24), followed by remdesivir (OR, 0.13; 95% CI: 0.03-0.57) and then molnupiravir (OR, 0.67; 95% CI: 0.46-0.99). The rank probability for each treatment calculated using the P-score revealed that nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir was the best anti-viral treatment, followed by remdesivir and then molnupiravir. Finally, anti-viral agents were not associated with an increased risk of adverse events compared with the placebo. For non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who are at risk of disease progression, the currently recommended three anti-viral agents, nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir, molnupiravir and remdesivir, should continue to be recommended for the prevention of disease progression. Among them, oral nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir and intravenous remdesivir seem to be the better choice, followed by molnupiravir, as determined by this network meta-analysis. Additionally, these three anti-viral agents were shown to be as tolerable as the placebo in this clinical setting.

The effect of inhaled corticosteroids on the outcomes of patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: The effect of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) on the clinical outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was not known. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Only phase 2 and 3 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) from electronic databases that investigated ICS in the treatment of COVID-19 patients were included. The outcomes of interest were the resolution of symptoms, risk of hospitalization or urgent medical visit, mortality, and the incidence of adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Five RCTs involving 1243 patients who received ICS and 1526 patients with placebo or usual care were included. The ICS group had a higher rate of symptom resolution than the control group at day 14 (risk ratio [RR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-1.30, p < 0.00001) and day 28 (RR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.06-1.18, p < 0.0001). Additionally, the ICS group had a significantly lower risk of needing urgent medical care or hospitalization than the control group (RR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.05-0.50; I2 = 0, p = 0.002). However, no significant difference in the 28-day mortality rate. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, ICS therapy improved symptom resolution, and decreased the risk of needing urgent medical care or hospitalization.

Mental health crisis in healthcare providers in the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional facility-based survey

ObjectivesDuring a pandemic, healthcare providers experience increased mental and physical burden. Burnout can lead to treatment errors, patient mortality, increased suicidal ideation and substance abuse as well as medical malpractice suits among medical staff. This study aimed to investigate the occurrence of burnout, acute stress disorder, anxiety disorder and depressive disorder among healthcare providers at the third month of the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignA cross-sectional facility-based survey.SettingHospitals around the country with different levels of care.ParticipantsA total of 1795 respondents, including 360 men and 1435 women who participated in the survey.Primary outcome measuresBurnout was assessed using the Physician Work Life Study. A score of ≥3 implied burnout.ResultsOf the 1795 respondents, 723 (40.3%) reported burnout, and 669 (37.3%) cared for patients with COVID-19. Anxiety levels were mild in 185 (10.3%) respondents, moderate in 209 (11.6%) and severe in 1401 (78.1%). The mean Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale-10 score was 9.5±6.3, and 817 (45.5%) respondents were classified as having depression. Factors associated with burnout were working in acute and critical care (ACC) divisions (adjusted OR (aOR)=1.84, 95% CI 1.20 to 3.39, p=0.019), caring for patients with COVID-19 (aOR=3.90, 95% CI 1.14 to 13.37, p=0.031) and having depressive disorder (aOR=9.44, 95% CI 7.44 to 11.97, p<0.001).ConclusionsPhysicians and nurses are vulnerable to burnout during a pandemic, especially those working in ACC divisions. Anxiety disorder, depressive disorder and care of patients with COVID-19 may be factors that influence the occurrence of burnout among healthcare providers.

Attitude and behavior toward bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation during COVID-19 outbreak

Background: Outbreaks of emerging infectious diseases, such as COVID-19, have negative impacts on bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (BCPR) for fear of transmission while breaking social distancing rules. The latest guidelines recommend hands-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and facemask use. However, public willingness in this setup remains unknown. Methods: A cross-sectional, unrestricted volunteer Internet survey was conducted to assess individuals' attitudes and behaviors toward performing BCPR, pre-existing CPR training, occupational identity, age group, and gender. The raking method for weights and a regression analysis for the predictors of willingness were performed. Results: Among 1,347 eligible respondents, 822 (61%) had negative attitudes toward performing BCPR. Healthcare providers (HCPs) and those with pre-existing CPR training had fewer negative attitudes (p < 0.001);HCPs and those with pre-existing CPR training and unchanged attitude showed more positive behaviors toward BCPR (p < 0.001). Further, 9.7% of the respondents would absolutely refuse to perform BCPR. In contrast, 16.9% would perform BCPR directly despite the outbreak. Approximately 9.9% would perform it if they were instructed, 23.5%, if they wore facemasks, and 40.1%, if they were to perform hands-only CPR. Interestingly, among the 822 respondents with negative attitudes, over 85% still tended to perform BCPR in the abovementioned situations. The weighted analysis showed similar results. The adjusted predictors for lower negative attitudes toward BCPR were younger age, being a man, and being an HCP;those for more positive behaviors were younger age and being an HCP. Conclusions: Outbreaks of emerging infectious diseases, such as COVID-19, have negative impacts on attitudes and behaviors toward BCPR. Younger individuals, men, HCPs, and those with pre-existing CPR training tended to show fewer negative attitudes and behaviors. Meanwhile, most individuals with negative attitudes still expressed positive behaviors under safer measures such as facemask protection, hands-only CPR, and available dispatch instructions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

The impact of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies on the outcomes of COVID-19 outpatients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

To assess the clinical efficacy and safety of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mABs) for outpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) databases were searched from inception to July 19, 2021. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the clinical efficacy and safety of neutralizing mABs in the treatment of COVID-19 outpatients were included. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the quality of the included RCTs. The primary outcome was the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization or emergency department (ED) visits. The secondary outcomes were the risk of death and adverse events (AEs). Five articles were included, in which 3309 patients received neutralizing mAB and 2397 patients received a placebo. A significantly lower rate of hospitalization or ED visits was observed among patients who received neutralizing mABs than those who received a placebo (1.7% vs. 6.5%, odds ratios (OR): 0.26; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.19-0.36; I2 = 0%). In addition, the rate of hospitalization was significantly lower in the patients who received neutralizing mABs than in the control group (OR: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.17-0.34; I2 = 0%). The mortality rate was also significantly lower in the patients who received neutralizing mABs than in the control group (OR: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.05-0.58; I2 = 3%). Neutralizing mABs were associated with a similar risk of any AE (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.64-1.01; I2 = 52%) and a lower risk of serious AEs (OR: 0.37; 97% CI: 0.19-0.72; I2 = 45%) compared with a placebo. Neutralizing mABs can help reduce the risk of hospitalization or ED visits in COVID-19 outpatients. For these patients, neutralizing mABs are safe and not associated with a higher risk of AEs than a placebo.