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.

SARS-CoV-2 Transmission in the Military during the Early Phase of the Pandemic-A Systematic Analysis.

Militaries worldwide have been affected by COVID-19 pandemic. However, the impact and epidemiological characteristics of transmission during the early phase of the pandemic is not well-studied. This study aims to systematically estimate the baseline incidence of COVID-19 in the military worldwide and identify the potential risk factors of transmission and clinical characteristics of the cases. English and Chinese literature reporting COVID-19 cases in military worldwide published on four electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and CKNI) through 28 May 2021 were systematically screened and synthesized qualitatively. Forty-six studies involving at least 711,408 military personnel in 17 countries were synthesized. Low incidence of cases was observed in the military with pooled COVID-19 incidence of 0.19% (95%CI: 0.00-9.18%). We observed a higher incidence among those (1) with overseas exposure (39.85%; 95%CI: 0.00-95.87%) rather than local exposure (3.03%; 95%CI: 0.00-12.53%), (2) who were on either local/overseas military deployment (26.78%; 95%CI: 0.00-71.51%) as compared to those not deployed (4.37%; 95%CI: 0.00-17.93%), and (3) on overseas military deployment (39.84%; 95%CI: 0.00-95.87%) as compared to local military deployment (3.03%; 95%CI: 2.37-3.74%). The majority of the cases were symptomatic (77.90% (95%CI: 43.91-100.00%)); hospitalization and mortality rates were low at 4.43% (95%CI: 0.00-25.34%) and 0.25% (95%CI: 0.00-0.85%), respectively; and headache, anosmia, ageusia, myalgia, nasal congestion, and cough were the most commonly observed symptoms. Overseas and local deployment were observed to have higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Sustainable, active SARS-CoV-2 surveillance strategies are crucial to detect and contain transmission early during military deployments.

SARS-CoV-2 Transmission in the Military during the Early Phase of the Pandemic-A Systematic Analysis

Militaries worldwide have been affected by COVID-19 pandemic. However, the impact and epidemiological characteristics of transmission during the early phase of the pandemic is not well-studied. This study aims to systematically estimate the baseline incidence of COVID-19 in the military worldwide and identify the potential risk factors of transmission and clinical characteristics of the cases. English and Chinese literature reporting COVID-19 cases in military worldwide published on four electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and CKNI) through 28 May 2021 were systematically screened and synthesized qualitatively. Forty-six studies involving at least 711,408 military personnel in 17 countries were synthesized. Low incidence of cases was observed in the military with pooled COVID-19 incidence of 0.19% (95%CI: 0.00–9.18%). We observed a higher incidence among those (1) with overseas exposure (39.85%;95%CI: 0.00–95.87%) rather than local exposure (3.03%;95%CI: 0.00–12.53%), (2) who were on either local/overseas military deployment (26.78%;95%CI: 0.00–71.51%) as compared to those not deployed (4.37%;95%CI: 0.00–17.93%), and (3) on overseas military deployment (39.84%;95%CI: 0.00–95.87%) as compared to local military deployment (3.03%;95%CI: 2.37–3.74%). The majority of the cases were symptomatic (77.90% (95%CI: 43.91–100.00%));hospitalization and mortality rates were low at 4.43% (95%CI: 0.00–25.34%) and 0.25% (95%CI: 0.00–0.85%), respectively;and headache, anosmia, ageusia, myalgia, nasal congestion, and cough were the most commonly observed symptoms. Overseas and local deployment were observed to have higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Sustainable, active SARS-CoV-2 surveillance strategies are crucial to detect and contain transmission early during military deployments.

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.

Impact of travel ban implementation on COVID-19 spread in Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong and South Korea during the early phase of the pandemic: a comparative study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has elicited imposition of some form of travel restrictions by almost all countries in the world. Most restrictions currently persist, although some have been gradually eased. It remains unclear if the trade-off from the unprecedented disruption to air travel was well worth for pandemic containment. METHOD: A comparative analysis was conducted on Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong and South Korea's COVID-19 response. Data on COVID-19 cases, travel-related and community interventions, socio-economic profile were consolidated. Trends on imported and local cases were analyzed using computations of moving averages, rate of change, particularly in response to distinct waves of travel-related interventions due to the outbreak in China, South Korea, Iran & Italy, and Europe. RESULTS: South Korea's travel restrictions were observed to be consistently more lagged in terms of timeliness and magnitude, with their first wave of travel restrictions on flights departing from China implemented 34 days after the outbreak in Wuhan, compared to 22-26 days taken by Singapore, Taiwan and Hong Kong. South Korea's restrictions against all countries came after 91 days, compared to 78-80 days for the other three countries. The rate of change of imported cases fell by 1.08-1.43 across all four countries following the first wave of travel restrictions on departures from China, and by 0.22-0.52 in all countries except South Korea in the fifth wave against all international travellers. Delayed rate of change of local cases resulting from travel restrictions imposed by the four countries with intrinsic importation risk, were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: Travel restriction was effective in preventing COVID-19 case importation in early outbreak phase, but may still be limited in preventing general local transmission. The impact of travel restrictions, regardless of promptness, in containing epidemics likely also depends on the effectiveness of local surveillance and non-pharmaceutical interventions concurrently implemented.

Wastewater surveillance to infer COVID-19 transmission: A systematic review.

Successful detection of SARS-COV-2 in wastewater suggests the potential utility of wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) for COVID-19 community surveillance. This systematic review aims to assess the performance of wastewater surveillance as early warning system of COVID-19 community transmission. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Medline, Embase and the WBE Consortium Registry according to PRISMA guidelines for relevant articles published until 31st July 2021. Relevant data were extracted and summarized. Quality of each paper was assessed using an assessment tool adapted from Bilotta et al.'s tool for environmental science. Of 763 studies identified, 92 studies distributed across 34 countries were shortlisted for qualitative synthesis. A total of 26,197 samples were collected between January 2020 and May 2021 from various locations serving population ranging from 321 to 11,400,000 inhabitants. Overall sample positivity was moderate at 29.2% in all examined settings with the spike (S) gene having maximum rate of positive detections and nucleocapsid (N) gene being the most targeted. Wastewater signals preceded confirmed cases by up to 63 days, with 13 studies reporting sample positivity before the first cases were detected in the community. At least 50 studies reported an association of viral load with community cases. While wastewater surveillance cannot replace large-scale diagnostic testing, it can complement clinical surveillance by providing early signs of potential transmission for more active public health responses. However, more studies using standardized and validated methods are required along with risk analysis and modelling to understand the dynamics of viral outbreaks.

Micronutrients Deficiency, Supplementation and Novel Coronavirus Infections-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Micronutrients play roles in strengthening and maintaining immune function, but their supplementation and/or deficiency effects on respiratory tract infections are inconclusive. This review aims to systematically assess the associations between micronutrient supplementation or deficiency, with novel coronavirus incidence and disease severity. METHODS: Systematic literature searches conducted in five electronic databases identified 751 unique studies, of which 33 studies (five supplementation studies, one supplementation and deficiency study, and 27 deficiency studies) were eventually included in this review. Proportions of incidence and severity outcomes in each group, and adjusted summary statistics with their relevant 95% confidence intervaIs (CI) were extracted. Data from 19 studies were pooled in meta-analysis using the generic inverse variance method. FINDINGS: A total of 360,346 patients across 16 countries, with a mean age between 32 and 87.7 years, were involved across 33 studies. All studies were on COVID-19 infections. In individuals without micronutrient deficiency, there was a significant reduction on odds of COVID-19 incidence (pooled OR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.18, 0.78), and ICU admissions or severe/critical disease onset when combined as a severity outcome (pooled OR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.08, 0.89). Insignificant protective effects were observed on other outcome measures, namely mortality, ICU admission, progression to respiratory-related complications, severe/critical disease onset or requiring respiratory support and hospitalization rate. CONCLUSION: The absence of micronutrient deficiency significantly reduced COVID-19 incidence and clinical deterioration in hospitalized patients. Usage of micronutrients as prophylaxis and complementary supplement in therapeutic management of COVID-19 patients may be a promising and cost-effective approach warranting in-depth investigation.

Potential Rapid Diagnostics, Vaccine and Therapeutics for 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV): A Systematic Review.

Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.