Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 12 de 12
Filter
1.
Epidemiol Infect ; 150: e196, 2022 Nov 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2301455

ABSTRACT

Following the report of the first COVID-19 case in Nepal on 23 January 2020, three major waves were documented between 2020 and 2021. By the end of July 2022, 986 596 cases of confirmed COVID-19 and 11 967 deaths had been reported and 70.5% of the population had received at least two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine. Prior to the pandemic, a large dengue virus (DENV) epidemic affected 68 out of 77 districts, with 17 932 cases and six deaths recorded in 2019. In contrast, the country's Epidemiology and Disease Control Division reported 530 and 540 dengue cases in the pandemic period (2020 and 2021), respectively. Furthermore, Kathmandu reported just 63 dengue cases during 2020 and 2021, significantly lower than the 1463 cases reported in 2019. Serological assay showed 3.2% positivity rates for anti-dengue immunoglobulin M antibodies during the pandemic period, contrasting with 26.9-40% prior to it. Real-time polymerase chain reaction for DENV showed a 0.5% positive rate during the COVID-19 pandemic which is far lower than the 57.0% recorded in 2019. Continuing analyses of dengue incidence and further strengthening of surveillance and collaboration at the regional and international levels are required to fully understand whether the reduction in dengue incidence/transmission were caused by movement restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines , Pandemics , Nepal/epidemiology , Antibodies, Viral
2.
Rev Med Virol ; : e2398, 2022 Sep 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2284464

ABSTRACT

The emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) has created great global distress. This variant of concern shows multiple sublineages, importantly B.1.1.529.1 (BA.1), BA.1 + R346K (BA.1.1), and B.1.1.529.2 (BA.2), each with unique properties. However, little is known about this new variant, specifically its sub-variants. A narrative review was conducted to summarise the latest findings on transmissibility, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and efficacy of current vaccines and treatments. Omicron has shown two times higher transmission rates than Delta and above ten times more infectious than other variants over a similar period. With more than 30 mutations in the spike protein's receptor-binding domain, there is reduced detection by conventional RT-PCR and rapid antigen tests. Moreover, the two-dose vaccine effectiveness against Delta and Omicron variants was found to be approximately 21%, suggesting an urgent need for a booster dose to prevent the possibility of breakthrough infections. However, the current vaccines remain highly efficacious against severe disease, hospitalisation, and mortality. Japanese preliminary lab data elucidated that the Omicron sublineage BA.2 shows a higher illness severity than BA.1. To date, the clinical management of Omicron remains unchanged, except for monoclonal antibodies. Thus far, only Bebtelovimab could sufficiently treat all three sub-variants of Omicron. Further studies are warranted to understand the complexity of Omicron and its sub-variants. Such research is necessary to improve the management and prevention of Omicron infection.

3.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 2022 Nov 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2184726
4.
Curr Med Res Opin ; 38(12): 2021-2028, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2028797

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused high morbidity and mortality worldwide. Since there is not enough evidence of risk factors of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, this study aimed to evaluate them. METHODS: This survey-based study was conducted across 66 countries from May to November 2020 among suspected and confirmed individuals with COVID-19. The stepwise AIC method was utilized to determine the optimal multivariable logistic regression to explore predictive factors of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. RESULTS: Among 2372 respondents who participated in the study, there were 1172 valid responses. The profession of non-healthcare-worker (OR: 1.77, 95%CI: 1.04-3.00, p = .032), history of SARS-CoV or MERS-CoV infection (OR: 4.78, 95%CI: 2.34-9.63, p < .001), higher frequency of contact with colleagues (OR: 1.17, 95%CI: 1.01-1.37, p = .041), and habit of hugging when greeting (OR: 1.25, 95%CI: 1.00-1.56, p = .049) were associated with an increased risk of contracting COVID-19. Current smokers had a lower likelihood of having COVID-19 compared to former smokers (OR: 5.41, 95%CI: 1.93-17.49, p = .002) or non-smokers (OR: 3.69, 95%CI: 1.48-11.11, p = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests several risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 transmission including the profession of non-healthcare workers, history of other coronavirus infections, frequent close contact with colleagues, the habit of hugging when greeting, and smoking status.


Since there is not enough evidence of risk factors of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, this study aimed to evaluate them. The risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection was higher among non-healthcare workers and among those who had a history of being tested positive for SARS-CoV or MERS-CoV before the COVID-19 outbreak. The habit of frequent contact with colleagues or hugging when greeting significantly increased the risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2. The current smokers had a lower risk of getting infected with SARS-CoV-2 than others who had a habit of smoking tobacco in the past or who had never smoked.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Risk Factors
5.
Life (Basel) ; 12(7)2022 Jul 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1938892

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The first COVID-19 case was reported in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. In March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 a global pandemic. The first COVID-19 case in Nepal was reported in January 2020 in a Nepalese man who had returned from Wuhan to Nepal. This study aims to evaluate the government of Nepal's (GoN) response to the COVID-19 pandemic and explore ways to prevent COVID-19 and other pandemic diseases in the future. As of May 2022, a total of 979,140 cases and 11,951 deaths associated with COVID-19 have been reported in Nepal. To prevent the spread of the virus, the GoN initiated various preventive and control measures, including lockdown strategies. The effects of COVID-19 are expected to persist for many years; the best strategies a resource-limited country such as Nepal can implement to control pandemic diseases such as COVID-19 in the pre-vaccine stage are to increase testing, tracing, and isolation capacity.

6.
PLoS One ; 16(12): e0258348, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1633398

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, there have been concerns related to the preparedness of healthcare workers (HCWs). This study aimed to describe the level of awareness and preparedness of hospital HCWs at the time of the first wave. METHODS: This multinational, multicenter, cross-sectional survey was conducted among hospital HCWs from February to May 2020. We used a hierarchical logistic regression multivariate analysis to adjust the influence of variables based on awareness and preparedness. We then used association rule mining to identify relationships between HCW confidence in handling suspected COVID-19 patients and prior COVID-19 case-management training. RESULTS: We surveyed 24,653 HCWs from 371 hospitals across 57 countries and received 17,302 responses from 70.2% HCWs overall. The median COVID-19 preparedness score was 11.0 (interquartile range [IQR] = 6.0-14.0) and the median awareness score was 29.6 (IQR = 26.6-32.6). HCWs at COVID-19 designated facilities with previous outbreak experience, or HCWs who were trained for dealing with the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, had significantly higher levels of preparedness and awareness (p<0.001). Association rule mining suggests that nurses and doctors who had a 'great-extent-of-confidence' in handling suspected COVID-19 patients had participated in COVID-19 training courses. Male participants (mean difference = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.22, 0.46; p<0.001) and nurses (mean difference = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.53, 0.81; p<0.001) had higher preparedness scores compared to women participants and doctors. INTERPRETATION: There was an unsurprising high level of awareness and preparedness among HCWs who participated in COVID-19 training courses. However, disparity existed along the lines of gender and type of HCW. It is unknown whether the difference in COVID-19 preparedness that we detected early in the pandemic may have translated into disproportionate SARS-CoV-2 burden of disease by gender or HCW type.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Personnel, Hospital , Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Education, Medical, Continuing/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Male , Personnel, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Socioeconomic Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires
8.
Clinical Medicine ; 21:S25-S26, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1380305

ABSTRACT

Declaration/announcement of emergency status Launching a public website for guidelines and information Establishing a 'coronavirus task force'/ expert board Conducting training programmes Government financial assistance for citizens/taxpayers Equal protection for immigrants/foreigners Regulation and stabilisation of food prices and daily necessities Require company to pay full salary to quarantined/isolated people Financial support to frontline cleaners, toilet attendants and security employees Free testing Free treatment Production/procurement of supplies (such as surgical masks, gloves, ventilators, or goods) Enhance production of sanitisers Enhancing hospital capacities (beds) Designating which hospitals can receive COVID-19 patients Equipping university housings, hotels, sports stadiums or building temporary hospitals to be ready to receive patients Guidelines for treatment of COVID-19 Application of telemedicine Research: Established in-house PCR assay Development of quick test kits Successfully identifying SARS-CoV-2 genes Launching clinical trial treatment of COVID-19 Launching vaccination development Call for research related to epidemiology, prevention and control measures Call for development or reuse of efficient low cost of PPE and medical devices such as ventilators Call for development of a new treatment or new drug discovery, PPE and medical devices such as ventilators Call for non-academic industries to join the research or give funds Box 1. Prohibition of group gathering more than (x) number of people in public places Physical distancing from each other in public (2 metres between individuals) Closure of schools Working from home Shelter in place Closure of public areas Closure of services Closure of public transport Closure of city/area hotspots (separating areas, restriction of movement) Protection of vulnerable people (elderly, people with suppressed immunities or relevant comorbidities: hypertension, heart disease, kidney disease, liver disease, chronic respiratory disease, diabetes, obesity) Supporting e-learning for students/tele-workplace Preventive and containment measures: Universal checklist of COVID-19 control measures (Continued) Using a medical declaration when having respiratory symptoms or close contact with a new confirmed patient Isolation for all confirmed cases (F0) Disinfect the workplace of the newly detected patient Closure of workplace of the newly detected patient Isolation/quarantine for patients with respiratory symptoms (flu-like illness) Isolation/quarantine for suspected cases with negative RT-PCR (who had contact with confirmed patients or came from hotspots) Protection of hospitals at outpatient units Protection of healthcare workers Guidelines for each type of health worker to prevent crosstransmission Guidelines for performing aerosol generation Guidelines regarding reuse of masks/PPE for healthcare workers Guidelines on disposal of dead bodies Guidelines for home care Guidelines for community service (public transportation, food delivery, postal, volunteer services) Additional items:

9.
J Breath Res ; 15(4)2021 09 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1361738

ABSTRACT

During the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, face masks are among the most common and practical control measures used globally in reducing the risk of infection and disease transmission. Although several studies have investigated the efficacy of various face masks and respirators in preventing infection, the results have been inconsistent. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of the randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the actual efficacy of face masks in preventing respiratory infections. We searched nine electronic databases up to July 2020 to find potential articles. We accepted trials reporting the protective efficacy of face masks against respiratory infections, of which the primary endpoint was the presence of respiratory infections. We used the ROB-2 Cochrane tool to grade the trial quality. We initially registered the protocol for this study in PROSPERO (CRD42020178516). Sixteen RCTs involving 17 048 individuals were included for NMA. Overall, evidence was weak, lacking statistical power due to the small number of participants, and there was substantial inconsistency in our findings. In comparison to those without face masks, participants with fit-tested N95 respirators were likely to have lesser infection risk (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.38-1.19,P-score 0.80), followed by those with non-fit-tested N95 and non-fit-tested FFP2 respirators that shared the similar risk, (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.12-4.36,P-score 0.63) and (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.38-1.71,P-score 0.63), respectively. Next, participants who donned face masks with and without hand hygiene practices showed modest risk improvement alike (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.67-1.17,P-score 0.55) and (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.70-1.22,P-score 0.51). Otherwise, participants donning double-layered cloth masks were prone to infection (RR 4.80, 95% CI 1.42-16.27,P-score 0.01). Eleven out of 16 RCTs that underwent a pairwise meta-analysis revealed a substantially lower infection risk in those donning medical face masks (MFMs) than those without face masks (RR 0.83 95% CI 0.71-0.96). Given the body of evidence through a systematic review and meta-analyses, our findings supported the protective benefits of MFMs in reducing respiratory transmissions, and the universal mask-wearing should be applied-especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. More clinical data is required to conclude the efficiency of cloth masks; in the short term, users should not use cloth face masks in the outbreak hot spots and places where social distancing is impossible.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Masks , Respiratory Protective Devices , Respiratory Tract Infections/prevention & control , Breath Tests , Humans , Network Meta-Analysis , Occupational Exposure , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Respiratory Tract Infections/transmission , SARS-CoV-2
10.
Front Public Health ; 9: 580427, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1317251

ABSTRACT

Background: The outbreak of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by a novel coronavirus (named SARS-CoV-2) has gained attention globally and has been recognized as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) by the World Health Organization (WHO) due to the rapidly increasing number of deaths and confirmed cases. Health care workers (HCWs) are vulnerable to this crisis as they are the first frontline to receive and manage COVID-19 patients. In this multicenter multinational survey, we aim to assess the level of awareness and preparedness of hospital staff regarding COVID-19 all over the world. Methods: From February to March 2020, the web-based or paper-based survey to gather information about the hospital staff's awareness and preparedness in the participants' countries will be carried out using a structured questionnaire based on the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) checklist and delivered to participants by the local collaborators for each hospital. As of March 2020, we recruited 374 hospitals from 58 countries that could adhere to this protocol as approved by their Institutional Review Boards (IRB) or Ethics Committees (EC). Discussion: The awareness and preparedness of HCWs against COVID-19 are of utmost importance not only to protect themselves from infection, but also to control the virus transmission in healthcare facilities and to manage the disease, especially in the context of manpower lacking and hospital overload during the pandemic. The results of this survey can be used to inform hospitals about the awareness and preparedness of their health staff regarding COVID-19, so appropriate policies and practice guidelines can be implemented to improve their capabilities of facing this crisis and other future pandemic-prone diseases.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Humans , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Pandemics , Personnel, Hospital , United States
12.
Clin Case Rep ; 9(4): 2132-2137, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1095251

ABSTRACT

Combination of convalescent plasma therapy and repurposed drugs such as dexamethasone and remdesivir could be beneficial for severe COVID-19 patients with obesity and chronic diseases such as diabetes and hypertension.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL