Investigation of bacterial and fungal population structure on environmental surfaces of three medical institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objectives: To evaluate the population structure of environmental bacteria and fungi in three different types of medical institutions and the potential risks due to antibiotic resistance during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: One hundred twenty-six environmental surface samples were collected from three medical institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 6,093 and 13,514 representative sequences of 16S and ITS ribosomal RNA (rRNA) were obtained by amplicon sequencing analysis. The functional prediction was performed using the Phylogenetic Investigation of Communities by Reconstruction of Unobserved States tool based on the Greengenes database and the FAPROTAX database. Results: On environmental surfaces in three medical institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic, Firmicutes (51.6%) and Bacteroidetes (25%) were the dominant bacteria, while Ascomycota (39.4%) and Basidiomycota (14.2%) were the dominant fungi. A number of potential bacterial and fungal pathogens were successfully identified by the metagenomic approach. Furthermore, compared with the bacterial results, the fungi showed a generally closer Bray Curtis distance between samples. The overall ratio of Gram-negative bacteria to Gram-positive bacteria was about 3:7. The proportion of stress-tolerant bacteria in medical institutions A, B and C reached 88.9, 93.0 and 93.8%, respectively. Anaerobic bacteria accounted for 39.6% in outdoor environments, 77.7% in public areas, 87.9% in inpatient areas and 79.6% in restricted areas. Finally, the ß-Lactam resistance pathway and polymyxin resistance pathway were revealed through functional prediction. Conclusion: We described the microbial population structure changes in three different types of medical institutions using the metagenomic approach during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that the disinfection measures performed by three healthcare facilities may be effective on the "ESKAPE" pathogens, but less effective on fungal pathogens. Moreover, emphasis should be given to the prevention and control of ß-lactam and polymyxin antibiotics resistance bacteria during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Traditional Chinese medicine treatment for COVID-19: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a rapidly spreading disease that has caused an extensive burden to the world. Consequently, a large number of clinical trials have examined the efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) for treating and preventing COVID-19, with coinciding proliferation of reviews summarizing these studies. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the methodological quality and evidence quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the efficacy of TCM. SEARCH STRATEGY: Seven electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chongqing VIP, Wanfang Data and SinoMed, were searched for systematic reviews and meta-analyses in October 2021. Search terms such as "Chinese medicine," "Lianhua Qingwen" and "COVID-19" were used. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials that evaluated the efficacy of TCM treatment of COVID-19 were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews Version 2.0 (AMSTAR 2) was used to evaluate the methodological quality. The quality of evidence was graded using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Data extraction and analysis were performed by two reviewers independently. RESULTS: There were 17 meta-analyses included in our overview. The intervention group was defined as TCM combined with Western medicine, while the control group was Western medicine alone. The methodological quality of all the included studies was moderate to poor. A total of 89 outcome indicators were evaluated, of which, 8 were rated as moderate quality, 39 as low quality, and 41 as very low quality. Only one outcome measure was graded as being of high quality. The moderate quality of evidence indicated that, for the treatment of COVID-19, the clinical efficacy of TCM in combination with Western medicine was better, in terms of lung recovery, rate of conversion to severe/critical cases, symptom scores, duration of symptoms, mortality, and length of hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Evidence from the included studies shows that, compared with conventional Western medical therapy alone, the addition of TCM to COVID-19 treatment may improve clinical outcomes. Overall, the quality of evidence of TCM for COVID-19 was moderate to poor. Meta-analyses of the use of TCM in the treatment of COVID-19 can be used for clinical decision making by accounting for the experiences of clinical experts, medical policies, and other factors.

Characteristics analysis for clinical study design relating to COVID-19 based on the database of ClinicalTrials.gov.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak is currently ravaging populations worldwide. Many studies were registered and conducted in rapid response to the epidemic, but how to choose the proper design for clinical trials remains the main concern. This study aimed to determine the fundamental characteristics of study design during the COVID-19 pandemic and provide references for other emerging infectious diseases. METHODS: We searched the database of ClinicalTrials.gov with the keyword "COVID-19" and compared the results with the design features of other conventional studies except for COVID-19. RESULTS: From January 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021, 55,334 trials were registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. Of all the registered trials, 6,408 were related to COVID-19 (11.58%). There were significant differences in the proportion of observational studies between COVID-19 (43.48%) and others (23.27%). The completion rate of observational trials and interventional trials in COVID-19 was 29.04% and 25.84%, respectively. COVID-19 trials showed a higher rate of completion than others (P<0.01). The time distribution and trend of observational studies and interventional studies varied considerably. CONCLUSION: Appropriately designed trials can help to improve research efficiency and reduce the possibility of research failure. In addition to randomized controlled trials, observational and single-armed studies are also worth considering.

Efficacy and Safety of Chinese Medicine for COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine for COVID-19 treatment with a focus on the benefits of symptomatic relief and time-related indexes. Seven electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chongqing VIP, Wanfang Data, and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry) were systematically searched from their beginning to April 2021. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing patients using Western therapy (WT) alone and those using additional Chinese medicine (WT [Formula: see text] CM) were included. Primary outcomes included overall efficacy, lung recovery, and time to viral assay conversion. Secondary outcomes included time and rate of individual symptom recovery, laboratory indicators, and adverse events. Overall, 15 RCTs, including 1469 participants, were included in this review. WT [Formula: see text] CM significantly improved overall efficacy (risk ratio, RR [Formula: see text] 1.21; 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.30; [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] 0.01) and lung recovery (RR [Formula: see text] 1.30; 95% CI:1.19 to 1.42; [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] 0.01) and shortened the time to viral assay conversion (weighted mean differences, WMD [Formula: see text]1.38; 95% CI: -1.98 to -0.78; [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] 0.01) and duration of chest distress (WMD [Formula: see text] 2.41; 95% CI: -2.99 to -1.83; [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] 0.01) compared to WT alone. There was no difference in safety between the WT [Formula: see text] CM and WT groups (RR [Formula: see text] 0.94; 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.39; [Formula: see text] 0.76). In conclusion, the synthesized evidence from 15 RCTs showed that additional Chinese medication may improve treatment efficacy, relieve symptoms, promote lung recovery, and reduce the inflammatory response against COVID-19, while not increasing the risk of adverse events compared with conventional Western medication alone.

Characteristics analysis for clinical study design relating to COVID-19 based on the database of ClinicalTrials.gov

Background and Objective The outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is currently ravaging worldwide. A large number of studies were registered and conducted in rapid response to the epidemic, but how to choose the proper design for clinical trials still remains the main concern. This study aimed to determine fundamental characteristics of study design during the COVID-19 epidemic and provide references for other emerging infectious diseases. Methods We searched the database of ClinicalTrials.gov with the keyword 'COVID-19′ and compared them with the design features of other conventional studies except for COVID-19. Results From January 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021, 55 334 trials were registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. Of all the registered trials, 6408 were related to COVID-19(11.58%). There were significant differences in the proportion of observational studies between COVID-19 (43.48%) and others (23.27%). The completion rate of observational trials and interventional trials in COVID-19 was 29.04% and 25.84%, respectively. COVID-19 trials showed a higher rate of completion than others (P<0.01). The time distribution and trend of observational studies and interventional studies varied considerably. Conclusion Appropriately designed trials can help to improve research efficiency and reduce the possibility of research failure. In addition to randomized controlled trials, observational and single-armed studies are also worth considering.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of indoor bioaerosols in hospitals: The influence of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate (1) the relationship between heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems and bioaerosol concentrations in hospital rooms, and (2) the effectiveness of laminar air flow (LAF) and high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) according to the indoor bioaerosol concentrations. METHODS: Databases of Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and Web of Science were searched from 1st January 2000 to 31st December 2020. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the quality of the studies. The samples obtained from different areas of hospitals were grouped and described statistically. Furthermore, the meta-analysis of LAF and HEPA were performed using random-effects models. The methodological quality of the studies included in the meta-analysis was assessed using the checklist recommended by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. RESULTS: The mean CFU/m3 of the conventional HVAC rooms and enhanced HVAC rooms was lower than that of rooms without HVAC systems. Furthermore, the use of the HEPA filter reduced bacteria by 113.13 (95% CI: -197.89, -28.38) CFU/m3 and fungi by 6.53 (95% CI: -10.50, -2.55) CFU/m3. Meanwhile, the indoor bacterial concentration of LAF systems decreased by 40.05 (95% CI: -55.52, -24.58) CFU/m3 compared to that of conventional HVAC systems. CONCLUSIONS: The HVAC systems in hospitals can effectively remove bioaerosols. Further, the use of HEPA filters is an effective option for areas that are under-ventilated and require additional protection. However, other components of the LAF system other than the HEPA filter are not conducive to removing airborne bacteria and fungi. LIMITATION OF STUDY: Although our study analysed the overall trend of indoor bioaerosols, the conclusions cannot be extrapolated to rare, hard-to-culture, and highly pathogenic species, as well as species complexes. These species require specific culture conditions or different sampling requirements. Investigating the effects of HVAC systems on these species via conventional culture counting methods is challenging and further analysis that includes combining molecular identification methods is necessary. STRENGTH OF THE STUDY: Our study was the first meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of HVAC systems on indoor bioaerosols through microbial incubation count. Our study demonstrated that HVAC systems could effectively reduce overall bioaerosol concentrations to maintain better indoor air quality. Moreover, our study provided further evidence that other components of the LAF system other than the HEPA filter are not conducive to removing airborne bacteria and fungi. PRACTICAL IMPLICATION: Our research showed that HEPA filters are more effective at removing bioaerosols in HVAC systems than the current LAF system. Therefore, instead of opting for the more costly LAF system, a filter with a higher filtration rate would be a better choice for indoor environments that require higher air quality; this is valuable for operating room construction and maintenance budget allocation.