ABSTRACT
Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) are currently consumed as live fish, primarily for catering or consumers, as an alternative to salmon in sashimi or dishes. However, Covid-19 has hampered store and restaurant operations. Therefore, developing suitable processing conditions to extend its shelf life, such as online distribution specifications while enhancing the filets' commercial value, would raise its production value. In this study, we investigated the fish filets salted in a 5% salt solution for 2 days and then smoked at 65 degrees C for 4 h under different storage conditions. As result, the higher rate of salt penetration and water loss in the resolved rigor mortis group was associated with tenderization of the meat compared to the rigor mortis group. Thermal-shrinkage and thermal-induced tissue destruction of the smoked fish filets during processing which affects the appearance, flavor, chewiness and overall acceptability. Nevertheless, according to the results of a consumer-type evaluation, the product characteristics of the fish filets from the resolution of rigor mortis group were consistent with those of the rigor mortis group, except for a weaker aroma. Thus, these results explain the relationship between frozen stored fish and the quality of processed products. The economic concept of regulating and distributing scheduling production between raw materials and finished products in the food industry conveys promising findings that will contribute to developing sustainable food processing systems.
ABSTRACT
Background: Hong Kong started its territory-wide COVID-19 vaccination program in February 2021. A territory-wide VAS (Vaccine Allergy Safety) Clinic was set up to assess individuals deemed at "higher risk" of COVID-19 vaccine-associated allergies. A novel "Hub-and- Spoke" model was piloted to tackle the overwhelming demand of VAS services by allowing non-allergists to conduct allergy assessment. This study aims to evaluate the outcomes and effectiveness of the VAS Hub-and- Spoke Model for pre-vaccination allergy assessment. Method(s): Medical records of patients attending the VAS Hub and Spoke Clinics between March and August 2021 were reviewed (n = 2725). We studied the overall and comparative results between the Hub (allergist-led) and Spoke (non-allergist- led) Clinics. The Hub and the HKWC Spoke Clinic were selected for subgroup analysis as they saw the largest number of patients (n = 1411). Result(s): A total of 2725 patients were assessed under the VAS Hub-and- Spoke Model. Overall, 2324 patients (85.3%) were recommended to proceed with vaccination (Figure 1). There were no significant demographic differences noted. Allergists recommended significantly more patients for vaccination than non-allergists (OR = 21.58 [95% CI = 10.16-45.82], p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed that 881/1055 (83.5%) of patients received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccination safely following assessment. Among those recommended vaccination, more patients assessed by allergists received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccination (OR = 4.18 [95% CI = 2.81-6.21], p < 0.001) (Table 1). Conclusion(s): The Hub-and- Spoke model has proven to be successful for the vaccination campaign. This study has illustrated the crucial role of allergists in countering vaccine hesitancy. Results from the study showed considerable differences in outcomes between allergist-led and non-allergist clinics. Precise reasons for these differences warrant further examination. We are hopeful the Hub-and Spoke model can be similarly adapted for other allergist-integrative services in the future.
ABSTRACT
Background The effectiveness of vaccination campaigns in the midst of a pandemic depends on both the vaccine's effectiveness and the general population's willingness to be vaccinated. To estimate the proportion of the general population willing to get COVID-19 vaccination and to identify factors, ie, the number of COVID-19 cases and deaths, and WHO Regions contributing to the willingness rate, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis compliant with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Methods A search of the existing relevant literature was conducted by means of Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, Registers, and other sources in order to identify studies published between November 2019 and April 2021. A total of 19 studies from 11 countries that satisfied the inclusion criteria (ie, studies exclusively on the general population, and participants aged 16 years and above) were retrieved. Data extraction and quality assessment were conducted. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 statistic, and publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and the Egger's test. A meta-analysis and a meta-regression analysis were conducted using STATA 16.1 software. Results The pooled rate of willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine among the general population was calculated to be 60.1% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 51.5, 68.4). Meta-analyses showed, on the one hand, that the highest pooled willingness to get vaccinated was 73% (95% CI = 62.3, 84.1) in the studies of countries with 1000-4000 COVID-19 cases per million population and, on the other, that the same measure was 71% (95% CI = 53.2, 89.1) in countries reporting >400 COVID-19 deaths per million population. The acceptance rates also varied in different WHO regions of the world. The meta-regression analysis showed that a COVID-19 death rate of >400 per million population or higher was significantly associated (P = 0.02) with the willingness rate. Conclusions The overall willingness among the general global population to get a COVID-19 vaccine is moderately high;however, the existence of hesitancy might be a major obstacle to the global efforts to control the current pandemic. Understanding the critical factors influencing the acceptance of pandemic vaccines may help health authorities to manage emerging public health threats better.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: COVID-19 infection has placed significant healthcare and economic burdens on society. Recent studies of patients recovered from COVID-19 infection demonstrate highly variable rates of cardiac involvement. A German cohort reported 78% cardiac involvement as defined by abnormalities seen on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) while more recent data suggests rates of cardiac involvement between 0.3% and 3%. Competitive athletes represent a unique population as they may pose greater risk for sudden cardiac death during competition due to myocarditis as a sequela of COVID-19 infection. Hypothesis: We hypothesize that among athletes with non-severe COVID-19 infection, a symptom driven clinical pathway would lead to a safe and cost-effective return to sports. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted in a cohort of collegiate athletes with non-severe COVID-19 infection returning to competitive sports. The primary outcomes were the prevalence of cardiac involvement based on symptoms and abnormalities with electrocardiograms (ECG), troponin, or transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE). CMR were performed for ongoing cardiopulmonary symptoms or abnormal cardiac test results. Evaluation for myocarditis using CMR was based on the updated Lake Louise criteria. Athletes without evidence of cardiac involvement were permitted to participate in a graduated protocol to return to play. Results: A sample size of 83 athletes (mean age 20 years;female athletes 34%) diagnosed with COVID-19 infection by PCR was analyzed. Abnormal findings suggestive of cardiac involvement were detected by symptoms [82%, Standard Error of Mean (SEM) 0.04], ECG (2.5%, SEM 0.04), troponin (0%, SEM 0), and TTE (0%, SEM 0). CMR was clinically indicated in 7 patients and there were no abnormal findings. No patients were hospitalized and during a clinical surveillance period (median follow up of 105 days), there were no adverse cardiac or non-cardiac events. Conclusions: There is a low prevalence of cardiac involvement among collegiate athletes with nonsevere COVID-19 infection. In this cohort, safe progression to competitive athletics using a symptom driven clinical pathway was demonstrated in a cost-effective manner.
ABSTRACT
Laboratory-based diagnostic measures including virological and serological tests are essential for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reactions (rRT-PCR) can detect SARS-COV-2 by targeting open reading frame-1 antibodies (ORF1ab), envelope protein, nucleocapsid protein, RNA-dependent RNA polymerase genes, and the N1, N2, and N3 (3N) target genes. Therefore, rRT-PCR remains the primary method of diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 despite being limited by false-negative results, long turnaround, complex protocols, and a need for skilled personnel. Serological diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is simple and does not require complex techniques and equipment, rendering it suitable for rapid detection and massive screening. However, serological tests cannot confirm SARS-CoV-2, and results will be false negative when antibody concentrations fall below detection limits. Balancing the increased use of laboratory tests, risk of testing errors, need for tests, burden on healthcare systems, benefits of early diagnosis, and risk of unnecessary exposure is a significant and persistent challenge in diagnosing COVID-19. Copyright (c) 2020, Taiwan Society of Microbiology. Published by Elsevier Taiwan LLC. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/bync-nd/4.0/).