Narrative Review: Addressing Covid-19 Vaccine Concerns in Special and Vulnerable Populations.

Public health advocates and healthcare professionals (HCPs) have been challenged with vaccine hesitancy and addressing misinformation. In order for HCPs and pharmacists, in particular, to serve as effective stewards of COVID-19 vaccine science in the interest of the public good, it is imperative for HCPs to appreciate the various factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy and vaccine distrust. A PubMed search was performed and relevant articles on COVID-19 vaccine in populations of interest were included. Information from health agencies, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as well as established professional health societies was incorporated for guidance. This review focuses on COVID-19 vaccine concerns in the populations of children, pregnancy and lactation, immunocompromised, and religious and ethnic disparities. We also discuss post emergency use authorization experience with respect to vaccine safety including annotations on Guillain-Barré Syndrome, myocarditis and pericarditis, and thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome.

Effectiveness and safety of Ivermectin in COVID-19 patients: A prospective study at a safety-net hospital.

Ivermectin has been found to inhibit severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) replication in vitro. It is unknown whether this inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 replication correlates with improved clinical outcomes. To assess the effectiveness and safety of ivermectin in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. A total of 286 patients with COVID-19 were included in the study. Univariate analysis of the primary mortality outcome and comparisons between treatment groups were determined. Logistic regression and propensity score matching (PSM) was used to adjust for confounders. Patients in the ivermectin group received 2 doses of Ivermectin at 200 µg/kg in addition to usual clinical care on hospital Days 1 and 3. The ivermectin group had a significantly higher length of hospital stay than the control group; however, this significance did not maintain on multivariable logistic regression analysis. The length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay and duration of mechanical ventilation were longer in the control group. However, a mortality benefit was not seen with ivermectin treatment before and after PSM (p values = 0.07 and 0.11, respectively). ICU admission, and intubation rate were not significantly different between the groups (p = 0.49, and p = 1.0, respectively). No differences were found between groups regarding the length of hospital stay, ICU admission, intubation rate, and in-hospital mortality.

Corticosteroid use in ARDS and its application to evolving therapeutics for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A systematic review.

Data regarding the use of corticosteroids for treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are conflicting. As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic progresses, more literature supporting the use of corticosteroids for COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS have emerged. Glucocorticoids are proposed to attenuate the inflammatory response and prevent progression to the fibroproliferative phase of ARDS through their multiple mechanisms and anti-inflammatory properties. The purpose of this systematic review was to comprehensively evaluate the literature surrounding corticosteroid use in ARDS (non-COVID-19 and COVID-19) in addition to a narrative review of clinical considerations of corticosteroid use in these patient populations. OVID Medline and EMBASE were searched. Randomized controlled trials evaluating the use of corticosteroids for COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS in adult patients on mortality outcomes were included. Risk of bias was assessed with the Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. There were 388 studies identified, 15 of which met the inclusion criteria that included a total of 8877 patients. The studies included in our review reported a mortality benefit in 6/15 (40%) studies with benefit being seen at varying time points of mortality follow-up (ICU survival, hospital, and 28 and 60 days) in the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS studies. The two non-COVID19 trials assessing lung injury score improvements found that corticosteroids led to significant improvements with corticosteroid use. The number of mechanical ventilation-free days significantly were found to be increased with the use of corticosteroids in all four studies that assessed this outcome. Corticosteroids are associated with improvements in mortality and ventilator-free days in critically ill patients with both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS, and evidence suggests their use should be encouraged in these settings. However, due to substantial differences in the corticosteroid regimens utilized in these trials, questions still remain regarding the optimal corticosteroid agent, dose, and duration in patients with ARDS.

Impact of COVID-19 on the pre and post analytical clinical laboratory testing processes- A performance evaluation study using six sigma.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the total testing process using six sigma metrics based on a comparison of pre and during pandemic periods. MATERIAL & METHODS: The study duration was over 12 months, 6 months before and 6 months after the COVID-19 onset in Pakistan in March 2020 after the recognition of the first case, using quality indicators (QIs). QIs were chosen from a model of QIs recommended by the CAP. Analysis was performed using Six Sigma calculators and QIs were expressed in percentage (%) and Sigma value were computed. Three levels of performance quality i.e. 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile were derived, being best, common and worst performance respectively. Between-group differences were tested using the Mann-Whitney's U test. RESULTS: The median defect percentages of these QIs ranged from 0% to 0.27% for the pre-pandemic period and 0% to 0.13% for the during pandemic period. Meanwhile, sigma values of the majority of the QIs were all above 4.0σ during the pre and the pandemic times. For the pre-analytical phase, sigma scores declined for 1 QI, improved for 3 QIs and remained same for 2. In the post analytical phase, no change in sigma metrics was noted for critical values notification. Considerable increase in defect percentage of inappropriate turnaround times was noted. CONCLUSION: The emergency preparedness proved to be fruitful as depicted by exceptional performance on the sigma metrics for most Qis both prior to and during the pandemic. The pre-analytical and the post analytical phases, being the most error sensitive requires strict vigilance.

A cross sectional evaluation of the corona-score for swift identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection at a tertiary care hospital in Pakistan.

BACKGROUND: The Corona-Score is one of the first and most widely used predictive model for coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The purpose of this study was to validate the performance of Corona-Score in a cohort of Pakistani patients pursuing care for suspected infection. METHODS: After seeking institution's ethical committee exemption, results of serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, absolute lymphocyte and neutrophil counts, chest x-ray findings and demographics of suspected COVID-19 cases with respiratory symptoms were recouped from electronic medical record. The pre-validated score as proposed by Kurstjens S et al., was calculated. The subjects were divided into SARS-CoV-2 positive and negative on the basis of reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) findings. Median and interquartile range (IQR) was calculated for the score in the two groups and the difference was assessed using the independent sample median test. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis was plotted. Statistical analyses were carried out using SPSS 26, with statistical significance set at p value < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of sixty cases, 30 (50%) RT-PCR positive and 30 (50%) negative with a median Corona-Score of 3.5 (IQR: 0-6) and 1.5 (IQR: 0-4) respectively, were evaluated. A p-value of 0.61 showing no statistically significant between group differences was observed. The area under the curve of Corona-Score in our population of patients was 0.59 (95% CI: 0.45-0.74). Using the cut-off values of four originally identified by Kurstjens et al. the model displayed 43.3% sensitivity and 70% specificity with an overall accuracy of 56.67%. CONCLUSION: Corona-Score displayed a lower diagnostic accuracy which may be attributable to the different genetic framework, viral strain and severity of the disease in Pakistanis compared to the population where this score was originally validated. However, large multi-center studies across the country are dire need of time to evaluate the score in overly exhausted health care setup and limited availability of PCR testing.

Analgesia and Sedation Strategies in Mechanically Ventilated Adults with COVID-19.

Evidence-based management of analgesia and sedation in COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome remains limited. Non-guideline recommended analgesic and sedative medication regimens and deeper sedation targets have been employed for patients with COVID-19 due to exaggerated analgesia and sedation requirements with extended durations of mechanical ventilation. This, coupled with a desire to minimize nurse entry into COVID-19 patient rooms, marked obesity, altered end-organ function, and evolving medication shortages, presents numerous short- and long-term challenges. Alternative analgesic and sedative agents and regimens may pose safety risks and require judicious bedside management for appropriate use. The purpose of this commentary is to provide considerations and solutions for designing safe and effective analgesia and sedation strategies for adult patients with considerable ventilator dyssynchrony and sedation requirements, such as COVID-19.