Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
Sci Rep ; 13(1): 6839, 2023 04 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2298000

ABSTRACT

With the changing epidemiology of COVID-19 and its impact on our daily lives, there is still an unmet need of COVID-19 therapies treating early infections to prevent progression. The current study was a randomized, parallel, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Ninety SARS-CoV-2 positive patients were randomized into 3 groups receiving placebo, 0.02% or 0.1% azelastine nasal spray for 11 days, during which viral loads were assessed by quantitative PCR. Investigators assessed patients' status throughout the trial including safety follow-ups (days 16 and 60). Symptoms were documented in patient diaries. Initial viral loads were log10 6.85 ± 1.31 (mean ± SD) copies/mL (ORF 1a/b gene). After treatment, virus load was reduced in all groups (p < 0.0001) but was greater in the 0.1% group compared to placebo (p = 0.007). In a subset of patients (initial Ct < 25) viral load was strongly reduced on day 4 in the 0.1% group compared to placebo (p = 0.005). Negative PCR results appeared earlier and more frequently in the azelastine treated groups: being 18.52% and 21.43% in the 0.1% and 0.02% groups, respectively, compared to 0% for placebo on day 8. Comparable numbers of adverse events occurred in all treatment groups with no safety concerns. The shown effects of azelastine nasal spray may thus be suggestive of azelastine's potential as an antiviral treatment.Trial registration: The study was registered in the German Clinical Trial Register (DRKS-ID: DRKS00024520; Date of Registration in DRKS: 12/02/2021). EudraCT number: 2020-005544-34.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Nasal Sprays , Viral Load , Double-Blind Method , Treatment Outcome
2.
BMC Med Res Methodol ; 22(1): 225, 2022 08 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2002110

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The use of routine data will be essential in future healthcare research. Therefore, harmonizing procedure codes is a first step to facilitate this approach as international research endeavour. An example for the use of routine data on a large scope is the investigation of surgical site infections (SSI). Ongoing surveillance programs evaluate the incidence of SSI on a national or regional basis in a limited number of procedures. For example, analyses by the European Centre for Disease Prevention (ECDC) nine procedures and provides a mapping table for two coding systems (ICD9, National Healthcare Safety Network [NHSN]). However, indicator procedures do not reliably depict overall SSI epidemiology. Thus, a broader analysis of all surgical procedures is desirable. The need for manual translation of country specific procedures codes, however, impedes the use of routine data for such an analysis on an international level. This project aimed to create an international surgical procedure coding systems allowing for automatic translation and categorization of procedures documented in country-specific codes. METHODS: We included the existing surgical procedure coding systems of five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom [UK]). In an iterative process, country specific codes were grouped in ever more categories until each group represented a coherent unit based on method of surgery, interventions performed, extent and site of the surgical procedure. Next two ID specialist (arbitrated by a third in case of disagreement) independently assigned country-specific codes to the resulting categories. Finally, specialist from each surgical discipline reviewed these assignments for their respective field. RESULTS: A total number of 153 SALT (Staphylococcus aureus Surgical Site Infection Multinational Epidemiology in Europe) codes from 10 specialties were assigned to 15,432 surgical procedures. Almost 4000 (26%) procedure codes from the SALT coding system were classified as orthopaedic and trauma surgeries, thus this medical field represents the most diverse group within the SALT coding system, followed by abdominal surgical procedures with 2390 (15%) procedure codes. CONCLUSION: Mapping country-specific codes procedure codes onto to a limited number of coherent, internally and externally validated codes proofed feasible. The resultant SALT procedure code gives the opportunity to harmonize big data sets containing surgical procedures from international centres, and may simplify comparability of future international trial findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov under NCT03353532 on November 27th, 2017.


Subject(s)
Clinical Coding , Surgical Procedures, Operative , Surgical Wound Infection , Europe/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , Surgical Procedures, Operative/adverse effects , Surgical Wound Infection/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL