Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Diagnostic Tests for Border Screening During the Very Early Phase of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during border screening among returning residents and prioritized travelers during the early phase of a pandemic can reduce the risk of importation and transmission in the community. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of various SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics and assess their potential utility as border screening for infection and immunity. Systematic literature searches were conducted in six electronic databases for studies reporting SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics (up to April 30, 2020). Meta-analysis and methodological assessment were conducted for all included studies. The performance of the diagnostic tests was evaluated with pooled sensitivity, specificity, and their respective 95% confidence intervals. A total of 5,416 unique studies were identified and 95 studies (at least 29,785 patients/samples) were included. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) consistently outperformed all other diagnostic methods regardless of the selected viral genes with a pooled sensitivity of 98% and a pooled specificity of 99%. Point-of-care (POC) serology tests had moderately high pooled sensitivity (69%), albeit lower than laboratory-based serology tests (89%), but both had high pooled specificity (96-98%). Serology tests were more sensitive for sampling collected at ≥ 7 days than ≤ 7 days from the disease symptoms onset. POC NAAT and POC serology tests are suitable for detecting infection and immunity against the virus, respectively as border screening. Independent validation in each country is highly encouraged with the preferred choice of diagnostic tool/s.

Factors associated with high compliance behaviour against COVID-19 in the early phase of pandemic: a cross-sectional study in 12 Asian countries

IntroductionRegardless of having effective vaccines against COVID-19, containment measures such as enhanced physical distancing and good practice of personal hygiene remain the mainstay of controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. Countries across Asia have imposed these containment measures to varying extents. However, residents in different countries would have a differing degree of compliance to these containment measures potentially due to differences in the level of awareness and motivation in the early phase of pandemic.ObjectivesIn our study, we aimed to describe and correlate the level of knowledge and attitude with the level of compliance with personal hygiene and physical distancing practices among Asian countries in the early phase of pandemic.MethodsA multinational cross-sectional study was carried out using electronic surveys between May and June 2020 across 14 geographical areas. Subjects aged 21 years and above were invited to participate through social media, word of mouth and electronic mail.ResultsAmong the 2574 responses obtained, 762 (29.6%) participants were from East Asia and 1812 (70.4%) were from Southeast Asia (SEA). A greater proportion of participants from SEA will practise physical distancing as long as it takes (72.8% vs 60.6%). Having safe distancing practices such as standing more than 1 or 2 m apart (AdjOR 5.09 95% CI (1.08 to 24.01)) or more than 3 or 4 m apart (AdjOR 7.05 95% CI (1.32 to 37.67)), wearing a mask when they had influenza-like symptoms before the COVID-19 pandemic, preferring online news channels such as online news websites/applications (AdjOR 1.73 95% CI (1.21 to 2.49)) and social media (AdjOR 1.68 95% CI (1.13 to 2.50) as sources of obtaining information about COVID-19 and high psychological well-being (AdjOR 1.39 95% CI (1.04 to 1.87)) were independent factors associated with high compliance.ConclusionsWe found factors associated with high compliance behaviour against COVID-19 in the early phase of pandemic and it will be useful to consider them in risk assessment, communication and pandemic preparedness.

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination intent in Singapore, Australia and Hong Kong.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant morbidity and mortality globally. As vaccines have been developed under expedited conditions, their safety and efficacy are being questioned by some populations leading to vaccine hesitancy, resulting in delayed vaccine uptake and herd immunity. This study aims to adopt a combination of Health Belief Model and other independent risk factors associated with high vaccine acceptance. METHODS: An anonymized cross-sectional survey was distributed between 15 January and 3 February 2021 across Singapore, Hong Kong and Australia among adult respondents through a certified online panel. Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were carried out to assess perception constructs followed by multivariate regression modelling to assess factors associated with high vaccine acceptance against SARS_CoV-2. RESULTS: A total of 3,133 anonymised participants from Singapore (n = 1,009), Australia (n = 1,118) and Hong Kong (n = 1,006) completed the survey. While age and gender were not significantly associated, Asian ethnicity, current smokers and self-efficacy were significant associated factors of increased vaccine acceptance. While specific practices like taking micronutrients more frequently, cleaning and disinfecting their house more often were positively associated with increased vaccine acceptance, seeking medical help for COVID-19 symptoms like loss of smell/taste and overall COVID-19 knowledge score were negatively associated. Increased likelihood of vaccine acceptance was seen among those that obtained COVID-19 information less frequently and used digital media or non-health-related sources like influencers as a source of information. Among the eight perception constructs, perceived susceptibility and perceived response efficacy were positively associated, while perceived barriers were negatively associated with high vaccine acceptance. CONCLUSION: While demographic parameters have weak association with vaccine acceptance, perceptions and practices parameters can help to better understand and influence vaccine acceptance. Study findings should provide guidance on the risk communication strategy to enhance vaccine acceptance for vaccination and boosters against new SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Diagnostic Tests for Border Screening During the Very Early Phase of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during border screening among returning residents and prioritized travelers during the early phase of a pandemic can reduce the risk of importation and transmission in the community. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of various SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics and assess their potential utility as border screening for infection and immunity. Systematic literature searches were conducted in six electronic databases for studies reporting SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics (up to April 30, 2020). Meta-analysis and methodological assessment were conducted for all included studies. The performance of the diagnostic tests was evaluated with pooled sensitivity, specificity, and their respective 95% confidence intervals. A total of 5,416 unique studies were identified and 95 studies (at least 29,785 patients/samples) were included. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) consistently outperformed all other diagnostic methods regardless of the selected viral genes with a pooled sensitivity of 98% and a pooled specificity of 99%. Point-of-care (POC) serology tests had moderately high pooled sensitivity (69%), albeit lower than laboratory-based serology tests (89%), but both had high pooled specificity (96–98%). Serology tests were more sensitive for sampling collected at ≥ 7 days than ≤ 7 days from the disease symptoms onset. POC NAAT and POC serology tests are suitable for detecting infection and immunity against the virus, respectively as border screening. Independent validation in each country is highly encouraged with the preferred choice of diagnostic tool/s.

Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of non-severe and severe pediatric and adult COVID-19 patients across different geographical regions in the early phase of pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

This systematic and meta-review aimed to compare clinical presentation, outcomes, and care management among patients with COVID-19 during the early phase of the pandemic. A total of 77 peer-reviewed publications were identified between January 1, 2020 and April 9, 2020 from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Chinese Medical Journal databases. Subsequently, meta-analysis of 40 non-overlapping studies, comprising of 4844 patients from seven countries, was conducted to see differences in clinical characteristics and laboratory outcomes across patients from different geographical regions (Wuhan, other parts of China and outside China), severity (non-severe, severe and fatal) and age groups (adults and children). Patients from Wuhan had a higher mean age (54.3 years) and rates of dyspnea (39.5%) compared with patients from other parts of China and outside China. Myalgia, fatigue, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and fatalities were also significantly more prevalent among Wuhan patients. A significant dose-response increase in prevalence of diabetes, D-dimer, white blood cells, neutrophil levels and ARDS was seen from non-severe to severe and fatal outcomes. A significant increase in mean duration of symptom onset to admission was seen between non-severe cases (4.2 days) and severe and fatal cases (6.3 days and 8.8 days, respectively). Proportion of asymptomatic cases was higher in children (20%) compared with adults (2.4%). In conclusion, patients with COVID-19 from Wuhan displayed more severe clinical disease during the early phase of the pandemic, while disease severity was significantly lesser among pediatric cases. This review suggests that biomarkers at admission may be useful for prognosis among patients with COVID-19.

SARS-CoV-2 Diagnostic Tests for Reopening of Borders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (preprint)

Background: Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 plays an essential role for border screening to deter importation and transmission in the community. This study aims to compare the accuracy of various SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics in the general population and assess their potential utility as border screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection and immunity against SARS-CoV-2.Methods: Systematic literature searches were conducted in six electronic databases for studies reporting SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics. Meta-analysis and methodological assessment were conducted for all included studies. Performance of diagnostic tests was evaluated with pooled sensitivity, specificity and their respective 95% confidence intervals.Results: 5,416 unique studies were identified and 95 studies (at least 30,660 patients/samples) were included. Nuclei acid amplification tests (NAAT) consistently outperformed all other diagnostic methods regardless of geographical regions and selected viral genes with pooled sensitivity of 98% and pooled specificity of 99%. Point-of-care serology tests had reasonably high pooled sensitivity (69%), albeit lower than laboratory-based serology tests (89%), but both had high pooled specificity (96-98%). Diagnostic tests were consistently more sensitive among symptomatic patients than asymptomatic patients, while serology tests were more sensitive for later (≥7 days) than early stages (≤7 days) of the disease. Serology tests was less sensitive in American studies (64%, 95% CI 57%-70%) as compared to Chinese (98%, 95% CI: 95%-99%) and European studies (93%, 95% CI: 78%-99%).Conclusion: Point-of-care NAAT and serology tests are suitable for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection and immunity against SARS-CoV-2, respectively as border screening.Funding Statement: Ministry of Defence (N-608-000-065-001)Declaration of Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Epidemiological and Clinical Characteristics of Non-Severe and Severe Pediatric and Adult COVID-19 Patients Across Different Geographical Regions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies (preprint)

Background: An understanding of key differences in epidemiological and clinical characteristics between geographical regions and populations is limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare clinical presentation, outcomes, and care management of different COVID-19 patient groups globally. Methods: The search strategy involved peer-reviewed studies published between 1st January and 9th April 2020 in Pubmed, Google scholar, and Chinese Medical Journal database. Pooled prevalence and means with 95% confidence intervals were computed using a random effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed between different geographies, clinical severities, and age groups. Results: A total of 77 publications were identified after full-text screening. Subsequently, data from 40 non-overlapping studies, comprising 4,884 patients from seven countries, were summarized. Wuhan patients were older (mean age: 54·3) and had higher rates of dyspnea (39·5%), compared to patients in other cities of China (mean age: 43·6; dyspnea: 9·7%) and outside of China (mean age: 50·5; dyspnea: 13·4%). Myalgia, fatigue, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and fatalities were also significantly more prevalent amongst Wuhan patients compared to other geographical subgroups (p<0·01). There was a significant dose-response increase in prevalence of diabetes, D-dimer, white blood cells, neutrophil levels and ARDS from non-severe to severe and fatal outcomes (p<0·01). A higher proportion of asymptomatic cases in children (20%) as compared to adults (2.4%) was observed in Chinese hospitals. Interpretation: COVID-19 patients had more severe clinical disease in Wuhan compared to patients outside of Wuhan and beyond China. Pediatric cases had less severe disease compared to adults. Biomarkers at admission may be useful for prognosis among COVID-19 patients.Funding Statement: Ministry of Defence, SingaporeDeclaration of Interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Epidemiological and Clinical Characteristics of Cases During the Early Phase of COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: On 29th December 2019, a cluster of cases displaying the symptoms of a "pneumonia of unknown cause" was identified in Wuhan, Hubei province of China. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to review the epidemiological and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 cases in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: The search strategy involved peer-reviewed studies published between 1st January and 11th February 2020 in Pubmed, Google scholar and China Knowledge Resource Integrated database. Publications identified were screened for their title and abstracts according to the eligibility criteria, and further shortlisted by full-text screening. Three independent reviewers extracted data from these studies, and studies were assessed for potential risk of bias. Studies comprising non-overlapping patient populations, were included for qualitative and quantitative synthesis of results. Pooled prevalence with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for patient characteristics. Results: A total of 29 publications were selected after full-text review. This comprised of 18 case reports, three case series and eight cross-sectional studies on patients admitted from mid-December of 2019 to early February of 2020. A total of 533 adult patients with pooled median age of 56 (95% CI: 49-57) and a pooled prevalence of male of 60% (95% CI: 52-68%) were admitted to hospital at a pooled median of 7 days (95% CI: 7-7) post-onset of symptoms. The most common symptoms at admission were fever, cough and fatigue, with a pooled prevalence of 90% (95% CI: 81-97%), 58% (95% CI: 47-68%), and 50% (95% CI: 29-71%), respectively. Myalgia, shortness of breath, headache, diarrhea and sore throat were less common with pooled prevalence of 27% (95% CI: 20-36%), 25% (95% CI: 15-35%), 10% (95% CI: 7-13%), 8% (95% CI: 5-13%), and 7% (95% CI: 1-15%), respectively. ICU patients had a higher proportion of shortness of breath at presentation, as well as pre-existing hypertension, cardiovascular disease and COPD, compared to non-ICU patients in 2 studies (n = 179). Conclusion: This study highlights the key epidemiological and clinical features of COVID-19 cases during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.