Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Int J Clin Pract ; 2022: 1389137, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1993105

ABSTRACT

Patients with diabetes have an increased risk of severe acute respiratory infections, and vaccination is their life-saving option. This study aimed to investigate the interest and knowledge of patients about influenza, pneumonia, and COVID-19(coronavirus disease 2019) vaccines. Materials. We handed out a questionnaire to patients with diabetes who were admitted to the endocrinology clinic between April and August 2021. The questionnaire collected information on demographic data, knowledge about respiratory tract disease vaccines, and hesitancy about vaccines. Results. Four hundred twenty-four patients (female = 256, male = 168) enrolled in the study. In this study, 148 (34.9%) participants were vaccinated against pneumonia, 155 (36.6%) against flu, and 312 (73.6%) against COVID-19. In addition, antivaccination sentiment was recorded in 8.7% of patients with diabetes. We found that participants in the study primarily rely on doctors as the source of information about vaccines (doctor (46.7%), nurse (1.2%), television (8.7%), friend/neighbour (8.7%), and others (2.6%)). The rate of vaccination was statistically higher than the presence of comorbid diseases. Conclusions. We examined the vaccine awareness of patients with diabetes and investigated factors affecting it. It was determined that vaccination awareness is affected by many factors, especially comorbid diseases and educational status. The study showed that patients primarily relied on doctors as their source of information for vaccination. Doctor-centered vaccination promotion programmes can increase the rate of vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Respiratory Tract Diseases , COVID-19/prevention & control , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Male , Vaccination
2.
Balkan Med J ; 39(3): 209-217, 2022 05 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1865616

ABSTRACT

Background: Broad-spectrum empirical antimicrobials are frequently prescribed for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) despite the lack of evidence for bacterial coinfection. Aims: We aimed to cross-sectionally determine the frequency of antibiotics use, type of antibiotics prescribed, and the factors influencing antibiotics use in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 confirmed by polymerase chain reaction. Study Design: The study was a national, multicenter, retrospective, and single-day point prevalence study. Methods: This was a national, multicenter, retrospective, and single-day point-prevalence study, conducted in the 24-h period between 00:00 and 24:00 on November 18, 2020, during the start of the second COVID-19 peak in Turkey. Results: A total of 1500 patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of COVID-19 were included in the study. The mean age ± standard deviation of the patients was 65.0 ± 15.5, and 56.2% (n = 843) of these patients were men. Of these hospitalized patients, 11.9% (n = 178) were undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation or ECMO. It was observed that 1118 (74.5%) patients were receiving antibiotics, of which 416 (37.2%) were prescribed a combination of antibiotics. In total, 71.2% of the patients had neither a clinical diagnosis nor microbiological evidence for prescribing antibiotics. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, hospitalization in a state hospital (p < 0.001), requiring any supplemental oxygen (p = 0.005), presence of moderate/diffuse lung involvement (p < 0.001), C-reactive protein > 10 ULT coefficient (p < 0.001), lymphocyte count < 800 (p = 0.007), and clinical diagnosis and/or confirmation by culture (p < 0.001) were found to be independent factors associated with increased antibiotic use. Conclusion: The necessity of empirical antibiotics use in patients with COVID-19 should be reconsidered according to their clinical, imaging, and laboratory findings.


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Turkey/epidemiology
3.
Nucleosides Nucleotides Nucleic Acids ; 40(5): 505-517, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1132307

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 has become a major public health problem since December, 2019 and no highly effective drug has been found until now. Numbers of infected people and deaths by COVID-19 are increasing every day worldwide, therefore self-isolation and protection are highly recommended to prevent the spread of the virus and especially to protect major risk groups such as the elderly population and people with comorbidities including diabetes, hypertension, cancer, cardiovascular diseases and metabolic syndrome. On the other hand, young people without any secondary disease have died by COVID-19 as well. In this study we compared two male patients infected by COVID-19 at the same age and one of them was diagnosed with G6PD deficiency. Both COVID-19 and G6PD deficiency enhance the risk of hemolysis and thrombosis. Serum biochemistry, hemogram and immunological parameters showed that risk of hemolysis and thrombosis may increase in the G6PD deficient patient infected by COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/genetics , Glucosephosphate Dehydrogenase Deficiency/genetics , Glucosephosphate Dehydrogenase/genetics , Thrombosis/genetics , Adult , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/virology , Glucosephosphate Dehydrogenase Deficiency/blood , Glucosephosphate Dehydrogenase Deficiency/complications , Glucosephosphate Dehydrogenase Deficiency/pathology , Hemolysis/physiology , Humans , Male , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Thrombosis/blood , Thrombosis/etiology , Thrombosis/virology
4.
Turk J Med Sci ; 50(8): 1792-1800, 2020 12 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-708993

ABSTRACT

Background/aim: The emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has had an enormous emotional impact on some vulnerable groups, such as people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (PLHIV). This study was planned with the aim of assessing the anxiety levels of PLHIV and the sources of their anxiety. Materials and methods: A web-based questionnaire was sent to PLHIV using the virtual snowball sampling method. The questionnaire included questions about sociodemographic status, information about HIV infection, and the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI). Additionally, some opinions of the participants about COVID-19 were asked. Results: A total of 307 respondents, with a median age of 33 years, from 32 different cities, participated in the study. More than half of the respondents reported the belief that COVID-19 was not sufficiently well-known by the medical community and nearly 45% believed that they would have more complications if they contracted COVID-19. One-fourth of the participants had anxiety. Having a preexisting psychiatric disorder, perceiving that they were practicing insufficient preventive measures, not being sure about the presence of any individuals with COVID-19 in their environment, and living with a household member with a chronic disease were found to be the risk factors of PLHIV for having anxiety during this pandemic. The BAI scores were correlated with the patient-reported anxiety levels about the spread of COVID-19 in Turkey, acquiring COVID-19, transmitting COVID-19 to another person, and transmitting HIV to another person. Among the stated conditions, the most common concern was the spread of COVID-19 all over the country, while the least common was transmitting HIV to someone else. Conclusion: The results revealed that a significant proportion of the sample had anxiety, and the findings were essential for developing evidence-based strategies for decreasing the anxiety of PLHIV, especially for those who had risk factors and to provide them with better health care during this pandemic or other pandemic-like crises.


Subject(s)
Anxiety , COVID-19 , HIV Infections , Mental Health/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Anxiety/diagnosis , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/etiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Female , HIV Infections/epidemiology , HIV Infections/psychology , Humans , Male , Psychological Distress , Qualitative Research , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Self-Assessment , Socioeconomic Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires , Turkey/epidemiology
5.
Postgrad Med ; 133(2): 237-241, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-707268

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Given the many medications used to treat novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and its comorbidities and complications, the risk of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and resulting patient harm is concerning. This study aimed to shed light on physicians' knowledge of potential DDIs related to COVID-19 treatment, to determine the effect of an information brief about these DDIs on their correct response rates, and to identify factors associated with higher levels of knowledge about these DDIs. METHODS: The knowledge of physicians regarding the clinical significance and intervention of 7 common potential DDIs during COVID-19 treatment was evaluated via an online survey. Using a pretest-posttest design, the physicians completed a multiple-choice questionnaire first using their existing knowledge, then received an information brief about the DDIs and completed the same questionnaire again. Pretest and posttest scores were evaluated and factors affecting correct response rates were determined using correlation, regression, and post-hoc analyzes. RESULTS: A total of 244 physicians participated in the survey, 147 (60.2%) of whom were involved in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. After the information brief, there were significant increases in the number of correct responses for both clinical significance and interventions (p < 0.0001). In comparisons of pretest knowledge, physicians involved in the treatment of COVID-19 patients showed significantly higher correct response rate for interventions compared to physicians who had not treated COVID-19 patients (p = 0.003). Post-hoc analysis to compare pretest correct intervention responses among all medical specialties revealed significant differences between infectious diseases and family practice (mean difference: 1.059; p = 0.005) and between internal medicine and family practice (mean difference: 1.771; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Physicians involved in the treatment of COVID-19 patients had more knowledge regarding clinical significance and appropriate management of potential DDIs than those not involved. Therefore, it may be beneficial to organize trainings and issue guidelines about potential DDIs for physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Drug Interactions , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Pandemics , Physicians/standards , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Male , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
6.
Rheumatol Int ; 40(10): 1707-1716, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-617036

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coranovirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has become an important health-care issue worldwide. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has also raised concerns among patients with inflammatory rheumatic conditions and their treating physicians. There are emerging data regarding the potential risks of SARS-CoV-2 for this particular patient group. However, less is known with regard to the course of COVID-19 among patients receiving IL-17 inhibitors. The aim of the current article is to review the growing body of knowledge on the course/management of COVID-19 in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases by presenting a SARS-CoV-2 infected case with ankylosing spondylitis under secukinumab therapy. A 61-year old patient with ankylosing spondylitis who was on secukinumab therapy for 5 months admitted with newly onset fever and gastrointestinal complaints. After being hospitalized, she developed respiratory manifestations with focal pulmonary ground-glass opacities and multiple nodular densities in both lungs. The patient was tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Substantial clinical improvement was obtained following a management plan, which included tocilizumab, hydroxychloroquine, prednisolone and enoxaparin sodium. PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus databases were searched by using relevant keywords and their combinations. The literature search revealed four articles reporting the clinical course of COVID-19 in seven rheumatic patients on secukinumab. The clinical course of SARS-CoV-2 infection was mild in most of these patients, while one of them experienced severe COVID-19. Interleukin-17 has been related to the hyperinflammatory state in COVID-19 and IL-17 inhibitors were presented as promising targets for the prevention of aberrant inflammation and acute respiratory distress in COVID-19. However, this hypothesis still remains to be proved. Further studies are warranted in order to test the benefits and risks of IL-inhibitors in SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Spondylitis, Ankylosing/drug therapy , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Enoxaparin/therapeutic use , Female , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Humans , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Prednisolone/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Spondylitis, Ankylosing/complications , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL