Prevalence and Associated Factors of Diabetes Distress, Depression and Anxiety Among Primary Care Patients With Type 2 Diabetes During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Egypt: A Cross-Sectional Study.

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is growing worldwide. T2DM is often complicated by a range of psychological disorders that interfere with glycemic control and self-care. Previous studies have reported diabetes distress, depression, and anxiety among patients with T2DM; however; little is known about the burden of these comorbid mental disorders in primary care patients with T2DM treated in Egypt during the COVID-19 era. Participants were selected by convenient sampling from eight rural primary healthcare facilities from Ismailia in Egypt. Symptoms of diabetes distress, depression and anxiety were assessed by using the Arabic version of the 20-item Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID), Patient Health Questionnaire 9, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scales, respectively. Multiple hierarchical logistic regression models were used to estimate the significant factors associated with diabetes distress, depression, and anxiety. A total of 403 individuals with T2DM were interviewed. The prevalence of severe diabetes distress was 13.4% (95% CI: 10.1-16.7), while prevalence of depressive and anxiety symptoms was 9.2% (95% CI: 6.4-12.0%), and 4.0% (95% CI: 2.1-5.9), respectively. In a series of hierarchical logistic regression models, significant predictors for diabetes distress were being married, illiterate, not-working, living with insufficient income, and having multi-comorbidities. Likewise, the significant predictors for depression and anxiety were elevated glycated hemoglobin level and the higher PAID total score, while having multi-comorbidities was a significant predictor for anxiety only. Diabetes distress was more prevalent than depressive and anxiety symptoms in this study population. Several sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were identified to be related with psychological problems among patients with T2DM, which necessitate a multidisciplinary team-based approach for optimal screening and management.

Adherence to hemodialysis and medical regimens among patients with end-stage renal disease during COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Adherence of patients with End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) to Hemodialysis (HD), prescribed medications, diet and fluid restrictions is essential to get the desirable outcome and prevent complications. During COVID-19 pandemic, ESRD patients became more concerned with attending the HD sessions and following the protective measures because of the potential for increased susceptibility to COVID-19. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on patients' adherence to HD and medical regimens. METHODS: Two hundred five ESRD patients on HD were interviewed with the ESRD Adherence Questionnaire (ESRD-AQ) and the Fear-of-COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S). Clinical and laboratory correlates of adherence were retrieved from patients' records. RESULTS: Self-reported adherence to HD showed that 19.5% were not adherent to HD during the pandemic compared to 11.7% before the pandemic (p < 0.001), with a significant agreement with the actual attendance of HD sessions (Kappa = 0.733, p < 0.001). Twenty-five patients (12.2%) had a history of COVID-19. The FCV-19S had a mean score of 18.8 and showed significant positive correlations with the pre-dialysis phosphorus and potassium. Multivariate analysis showed that the main predictors of non-adherence were the history of COVID-19, understanding and perception scores, and the Fear-of-COVID score. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic adversely affected the adherence of ESRD patients to HD and medical regimen. Strategies to mitigate patients' fears of COVID-19 and improve their understanding and perceptions of adherence to HD and medical regimen should be adopted in HD centers during the pandemic.

Acetylsalicylic Acid Compared with Enoxaparin for the Prevention of Thrombosis and Mechanical Ventilation in COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (ASA, aspirin) is a well-known and frequently studied drug for primary and secondary prevention of disease due to its anti-inflammatory and coagulopathic effects. COVID-19 complications are attributed to the role of thrombo-inflammation. Studies regarding the use of low-dose ASA in COVID-19 are limited. For this reason, we propose that the use of low-dose ASA may have protective effects in COVID-19-related thromboembolism and lung injury. This study was conducted to assess the efficacy of low-dose ASA compared with enoxaparin, an anticoagulant, for the prevention of thrombosis and mechanical ventilation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study on COVID-19-confirmed hospitalized patients at the Mansoura University Quarantine Hospital, outpatients, and home-isolated patients from September to December 2020 in Mansoura governorate, Egypt. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to assess the effect of ASA compared with enoxaparin on thromboembolism, and mechanical ventilation needs. RESULTS: This study included 225 COVID-19 patients. Use of ASA-only (81-162 mg orally daily) was significantly associated with reduced thromboembolism (OR 0.163, p = 0.020), but both low-dose ASA and enoxaparin, and enoxaparin-only (0.5 mg/kg subcutaneously (SC) daily as prophylactic dose or 1 mg/kg SC every 12 hours as therapeutic dose) were more protective (odds ratio [OR] 0.010, OR 0.071, respectively, p < 0.001). Neither ASA-only nor enoxaparin-only were associated with a reduction in mechanical ventilation needs. Concomitant use of low-dose ASA and enoxaparin was associated with reduced mechanical ventilation (OR 0.032, 95% CI 0.004-0.226, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose ASA-only use may reduce the incidence of COVID-19-associated thromboembolism, but the reduction may be less than that of enoxaparin-only, and both ASA and enoxaparin. Concomitant use of ASA and enoxaparin demonstrates promising results with regard to the reduction of thrombotic events, and mechanical ventilation needs.

Mental Stress, Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms and Interleuken-6 Level among Healthcare Workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels and its relationship to stress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms among healthcare workers (HCWs) compared to controls during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A total of 80 HCWs in Suez Canal University Hospital in Ismailia, Egypt, and 80 controls were analyzed during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS 21) questionnaire was used, and serum IL-6 level was determined in both groups. RESULTS: IL-6 levels were high in 81.2% (65) of HCWs compared to 36% (45) of controls (P < .05). The DASS score was higher in participants with high IL-6 levels (>3 ng/mL) than in those with mild to moderate levels (P < .05). The regression model revealed that the type of work as a healthcare staff, irregular or night shift, and stress were predictors of increased IL-6 levels among the studied sample (P < .05) (odds ratio = 20.30, 2.44, and 2.04, respectively). CONCLUSION: The IL-6 level and DASS score were higher in HCWs compared to those in controls during the COVID-19 pandemic. The type of work as a healthcare staff, stress, and irregular or night shift were predictors of increased IL-6 levels.