Perception of blood donation among employees of healthcare organizations during COVID-19 pandemic: A national multicenter cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Maintaining a safe and adequate blood supply during a crisis is a major challenge facing blood banks around the world. With the recent global COVID-19 crisis and the enforced "stay at home" lockdown, access to blood donors was limited. Since employees of healthcare facilities may act as potential blood donors, their perception of blood donation and their willingness to donate during the pandemic period is important to be assessed. STUDY DESIGN AND METHOD: A national cross-sectional study at six centers in Saudi Arabia was conducted using an online-based questionnaire that was distributed to all healthcare employees in these facilities between June and August 2020. RESULTS: Among the total of 1664 participants, 63.2% (n = 1051) did not donate blood during the last 2 years. However, 53% (n = 882) of participants reported they are likely to donate blood during the COVID-19 crisis. Furthermore, 85% (n = 1424) did not donate blood during the current pandemic, with the biggest worries of getting the COVID-19 infection in the donor center. The main concerns of participants were about adherence to physical distancing requirements and the safety of the donation procedure. The majority of health care participants (88.2%) support implementing a hospital policy for a voluntary blood donation by employees during crises. CONCLUSION: Recruitment of more blood donors among health care employees is a feasible solution to improve the blood supply during a crisis. This should be based on efforts throughout the year including regular awareness campaigns and effective communication.

International alliance and AGREE-ment of 71 clinical practice guidelines on the management of critical care patients with COVID-19: a living systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to systematically identify and critically assess the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19 with the AGREE II instrument. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We searched Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, CNKI, CBM, WanFang, and grey literature from November 2019 - November 2020. We did not apply language restrictions. One reviewer independently screened the retrieved titles and abstracts, and a second reviewer confirmed the decisions. Full texts were assessed independently and in duplicate. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. We included any guideline that provided recommendations on the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19. Data extraction was performed independently and in duplicate by two reviewers. We descriptively summarized CPGs characteristics. We assessed the quality with the AGREE II instrument and we summarized relevant therapeutic interventions. RESULTS: We retrieved 3,907 records and 71 CPGs were included. Means (Standard Deviations) of the scores for the 6 domains of the AGREE II instrument were 65%(SD19.56%), 39%(SD19.64%), 27%(SD19.48%), 70%(SD15.74%), 26%(SD18.49%), 42%(SD34.91) for the scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, editorial independence domains, respectively. Most of the CPGs showed a low overall quality (less than 40%). CONCLUSION: Future CPGs for COVID-19 need to rely, for their development, on standard evidence-based methods and tools.

Safety and Efficacy of Convalescent Plasma for Severe COVID-19: Interim Report of a Multicenter Phase II Study from Saudi Arabia.

OBJECTIVE: To present the interim findings from a national study investigating the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma (CP) containing detectable IgG antibodies as a treatment strategy for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). TRIAL DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: An open label, two-arm, phase-II clinical trial conducted across 22 hospitals from Saudi Arabia. The intervention group included 40 adults (aged ≥18 years) with confirmed severe COVID-19 and the control group included 124 patients matched using propensity score for age, gender, intubation status, and history of diabetes and/or hypertension. Intervention group included those (a) with severe symptoms (dyspnea; respiratory rate, ≥30/min; SpO2, ≤93%, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, <300; and/or lung infiltrates >50% within 24-48 h), (b) requiring intensive care unit (ICU) care or (c) experiencing life-threatening conditions. The control group included confirmed severe COVID-19 patients of similar characteristics who did not consent for CP infusion or were not able to receive CP due to its nonavailability. INTERVENTIONS: The intervention group participants were infused 300 ml (200-400 ml/treatment dose) CP at least once, and if required, daily for up to 5 sessions, along with receiving the best standard of care. The control group only received the best standard of care. OUTCOMES: The primary endpoints were safety and ICU length of stay (LOS). The secondary endpoints included 30-day mortality, days on mechanical ventilation and days to clinical recovery. RESULTS: CP transfusion did not result in any adverse effects. There was no difference in the ICU LOS (median 8 days in both groups). The mortality risk was lower in the CP group: 13% absolute risk reduction (P = 0.147), hazard ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.554 (0.299-1.027; P = 0.061) by log-rank test. There was no significant difference in the days on mechanical ventilation and days to clinical recovery. CONCLUSION: CP containing detectable antibodies is a safe strategy and may result in a decrease in mortality in patients with severe COVID-19. The results of the completed trial with a larger study sample would provide more clarity if this difference in mortality is significant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04347681; Saudi Clinical Trials Registry No.: 20041102.

Safety and Efficacy of Convalescent Plasma to Treat Severe COVID-19: Protocol for the Saudi Collaborative Multicenter Phase II Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic is expected to cause significant morbidity and mortality. The development of an effective vaccine will take several months to become available, and its affordability is unpredictable. Transfusion of convalescent plasma (CP) may provide passive immunity. Based on initial data from China, a group of hematologists, infectious disease specialists, and intensivists drafted this protocol in March 2020. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to test the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of CP in treating patients with COVID-19 across Saudi Arabia. METHODS: Eligible patients with COVID-19 will be recruited for CP infusion according to the inclusion criteria. As COVID-19 has proven to be a moving target as far as its management is concerned, we will use current definitions according to the Ministry of Health (MOH) guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and recovery. All CP recipients will receive supportive management including all available recommended therapies according to the available MOH guidelines. Eligible CP donors will be patients with COVID-19 who have fully recovered from their disease according to MOH recovery criteria as detailed in the inclusion criteria. CP donors have to qualify as blood donors according to MOH regulations except for the history of COVID-19 in the recent past. We will also test the CP donors for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies by a rapid test, and aliquots will be archived for future antibody titration. Due to the perceived benefit of CP, randomization was not considered. However, we will compare the outcome of the cohort treated with CP with those who did not receive CP due to a lack of consent or lack of availability. In this national collaborative study, there is a likelihood of not finding exactly matched control group patients. Hence, we plan to perform a propensity score matching of the CP recipients with the comparator group patients for the major characteristics. We plan to collect demographic, clinical, and laboratory characteristics of both groups and compare the outcomes. A total sample size of 575 patients, 115 CP recipients and 460 matched controls (1:4 ratio), will be sufficient to detect a clinically important hospital stay and 30-day mortality difference between the two groups with 80% power and a 5% level of significance. RESULTS: At present, patient recruitment is still ongoing, and the interim analysis of the first 40 patients will be shared soon. CONCLUSIONS: In this paper, we present a protocol for a national collaborative multicenter phase II study in Saudi Arabia for assessing the feasibility, safety, and potential efficacy of CP in treating patients with severe COVID-19. We plan to publish an interim report of the first 40 CP recipients and their matched comparators soon. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04347681; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04347681. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/23543.

The risk and prognosis of COVID-19 infection in cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

A number of studies have been published on outcomes of cancer patients infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus causing the COVID-19 infection. However, most of these reports are single-center studies with a limited number of patients. To better assess the outcomes of this new infection in this subgroup of susceptible patients, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 infection on cancer patients. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus for studies that reported the risk of infection and complications of COVID-19 in cancer patients. The literature search retrieved 22 studies (1,018 cancer patients). The analysis showed that the frequency of cancer among COVID-19 confirmed patients was 2.1% (95% CI: 1.3%, 3%) in the overall cohort. These patients had a mortality of 21.1% (95% CI: 14.7%, 27.6%), severe/critical disease rate of 45.4% (95% CI: 37.4%, 53.3%), ICU admission rate of 14.5% (95% CI: 8.5%, 20.4%), and mechanical ventilation rate of 11.7% (95% CI: 5.5%, 18%). The double-arm analysis showed that cancer patients had higher risk of mortality (OR = 3.23, 95% CI: 1.71, 6.13), severe/critical disease (OR = 3.91, 95% CI: 2.70, 5.67), ICU admission (OR = 3.10, 95% CI: 1.85, 5.17), and mechanical ventilation (OR = 4.86, 95% CI: 1.27, 18.65), compared to non-cancer patients. Further, cancer patients had significantly lower platelet levels and a significantly higher D-dimer, C-reactive protein, and prothrombin time. In conclusion, these results indicate that cancer patients are at a higher risk of COVID-19 infection-related complications. Therefore, cancer patients need diligent preventive care measures and aggressive surveillance for earlier detection of COVID-19 infection.