The COVID-19 Pandemic and Daily Steps in the General Population: Meta-analysis of Observational Studies.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to accelerate another pandemic: physical inactivity. Daily steps, a proxy of physical activity, are closely related to health. Recent studies indicate that over 7000 steps per day is the critical physical activity standard for minimizing the risk of all-cause mortality. Moreover, the risk of cardiovascular events has been found to increase by 8% for every 2000 steps per day decrement. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on daily steps in the general adult population. METHODS: This study follows the guidelines of the MOOSE (Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) checklist. PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched from inception to February 11, 2023. Eligible studies were observational studies reporting monitor-assessed daily steps before and during the confinement period of the COVID-19 pandemic in the general adult population. Two reviewers performed study selection and data extraction independently. The modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the study quality. A random effects meta-analysis was conducted. The primary outcome of interest was the number of daily steps before (ie, January 2019 to February 2020) and during (ie, after January 2020) the confinement period of COVID-19. Publication bias was assessed with a funnel plot and further evaluated with the Egger test. Sensitivity analyses were performed by excluding studies with low methodological quality or small sample sizes to test the robustness of the findings. Other outcomes included subgroup analyses by geographic location and gender. RESULTS: A total of 20 studies (19,253 participants) were included. The proportion of studies with subjects with optimal daily steps (ie, ≥7000 steps/day) declined from 70% before the pandemic to 25% during the confinement period. The change in daily steps between the 2 periods ranged from -5771 to -683 across studies, and the pooled mean difference was -2012 (95% CI -2805 to -1218). The asymmetry in the funnel plot and Egger test results did not indicate any significant publication bias. Results remained stable in sensitivity analyses, suggesting that the observed differences were robust. Subgroup analyses revealed that the decline in daily steps clearly varied by region worldwide but that there was no apparent difference between men and women. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that daily steps declined substantially during the confinement period of the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic further exacerbated the ever-increasing prevalence of low levels of physical activity, emphasizing the necessity of adopting appropriate measures to reverse this trend. Further research is required to monitor the consequence of long-term physical inactivity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021291684; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=291684.

Risk of COVID-19 Among Unvaccinated and Vaccinated Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A General Population Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at higher risks for SARS-CoV-2 infection and its severe outcomes before and after COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: Using a UK primary care database, we conducted 2 cohort studies to compare the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, and death from COVID-19 between patients with RA and the general population according to their COVID-19 vaccination status. We used exposure score overlap weighting to balance baseline characteristics between 2 comparison cohorts. RESULTS: Among unvaccinated individuals, the weighted incidence rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection (9.21 versus 8.16 of 1,000 person-months), hospitalization (3.46 versus 2.14 of 1,000 person-months), and death (1.19 versus 0.62 of 1,000 person-months) were higher among patients with RA than the general population over 3 months of follow-up; the corresponding adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were 1.10 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.00-1.24), 1.62 (95% CI 1.34-1.96), and 1.88 (95% CI 1.37-2.60), respectively. Among vaccinated individuals, the weighted rates of breakthrough infection (4.17 versus 3.96 of 1,000 person-months; HR 1.10 [95% CI 1.00-1.20]) and hospitalization (0.42 versus 0.32 of 1,000 person-months; HR 1.29 [95% CI 0.96-1.75]) were higher among patients with RA than the general population over 9 months of follow-up; however, no apparent difference in the risk of these outcomes was observed over 3 and 6 months of follow-up between 2 comparison cohorts. CONCLUSION: Patients with RA are still at higher risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalization than the general population after receiving COVID-19 vaccines. These findings support booster COVID-19 vaccinations and adherence of other preventive strategies among patients with RA.

Comparative effectiveness of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccines against COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Both BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Oxford-AstraZeneca) vaccines have shown high efficacy against COVID-19 in randomized controlled trials. However, their comparative effectiveness against COVID-19 is unclear in the real world. We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of the BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccines against COVID-19 in the UK general population. METHODS: We emulated a target trial using IQVIA Medical Research Database (IMRD), an electronic primary care database from the UK (2021). We included 1,311,075 participants, consisting of 637,549 men and 673,526 women age≥18 years, who received vaccination with BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 between January 1 and August 31, 2021. The outcomes consisted of confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalisation for COVID-19 and death from COVID-19 in the IMRD. We performed a cox-proportional hazard model to compare the risk of each outcome variable between the two vaccines adjusting for potential confounders with time-stratified overlap weighting of propensity score (PS). RESULTS: During a mean of 6.7 months of follow-up, 20,070 confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection occurred in individuals who received BNT162b2 vaccine (PS weighted incidence rate: 3.65 per 1000 person-months), and 31,611 SARS-CoV-2 infection occurred in those who received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (PS weighted incidence rate: 5.25 per 1000 person-months). The time-stratified PS weighted rate difference of SARS-CoV-2 infection for BNT162b2 group vs. ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group was -1.60 per 1000 person-months (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.76 to -1.43 per 1000 person-months), and the hazard ratio was 0.69 (95% CI: 0.68 to 0.71). The results were similar across the stratum of sex, age (<65 and ≥65 years), and study periods (i.e., alpha-variant predominance period and delta-variant predominance period). The PS weighted incidence of hospitalisation for COVID-19 was also lower in the BNT162b2 vaccine group than that in the ChAdOx1 vaccine group (RD: -0.09, 95%CI: -0.13 to -0.05 per 1000 person-months; HR: 0.65, 95%CI: 0.57 to 0.74). No significant difference in the risk of death from COVID-19 was observed between the two comparison groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based study, the BNT162b2 vaccine appears to be more efficacious than the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 infection and hospitalisation for COVID-19 but not death from COVID-19.

Risk of COVID-19 among unvaccinated and vaccinated patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a general population study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and its related severe sequelae between patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and the general population according to COVID-19 vaccination status. METHODS: We performed cohort studies using data from The Health Improvement Network to compare the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe sequelae between patients with SLE and the general population. Individuals aged 18-90 years with no previously documented SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. We estimated the incidence rates and HRs of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe sequelae between patients with SLE and the general population according to COVID-19 vaccination status using exposure score overlap weighted Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: We identified 3245 patients with SLE and 1 755 034 non-SLE individuals from the unvaccinated cohort. The rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 hospitalisation, COVID-19 death and combined severe outcomes per 1000 person-months were 10.95, 3.21, 1.16 and 3.86 among patients with SLE, and 8.50, 1.77, 0.53 and 2.18 among general population, respectively. The corresponding adjusted HRs were 1.28 (95% CI: 1.03 to 1.59), 1.82 (95% CI: 1.21 to 2.74), 2.16 (95% CI: 1.00 to 4.79) and 1.78 (95% CI: 1.21 to 2.61). However, no statistically significant differences were observed between vaccinated patients with SLE and vaccinated general population over 9 months of follow-up. CONCLUSION: While unvaccinated patients with SLE were at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and its severe sequelae than the general population, no such difference was observed among vaccinated population. The findings indicate that COVID-19 vaccination provides an adequate protection to most patients with SLE from COVID-19 breakthrough infection and its severe sequelae.

Gout and Excess Risk of Severe SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Vaccinated Individuals: A General Population Study.

OBJECTIVE: Gout patients often have multiple comorbidities, making them susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection and poor outcomes. This study was undertaken to examine the association between gout and the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe outcomes, especially in patients who have received a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. METHODS: We conducted 2 cohort studies using The Health Improvement Network in the UK. Individuals with gout and those without gout from the general population were followed up from December 8, 2020 to October 31, 2021. We estimated the rate difference (RD) and hazard ratio (HR) of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe outcomes (i.e., hospitalization and death within 30 days after SARS-CoV-2 infection) for individuals with gout versus those without gout using a Cox proportional hazards model according to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status. We adjusted for potential confounders by using overlap weighting of exposure scores. RESULTS: Among the vaccinated cohort, 1,955 cases of breakthrough COVID-19 infection occurred in 54,576 individuals with gout (4.68 cases per 1,000 person-months), and 52,468 cases occurred in 1,336,377 individuals without gout (3.76 cases per 1,000 person-months). The partially adjusted RD of breakthrough infection was 0.91 cases per 1,000 person-months (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.62-1.20 cases per 1,000 person-months), and the partially adjusted HR was 1.24 (95% CI 1.19-1.30). Gout was also associated with an increased risk of hospitalization (adjusted HR 1.30 [95% CI 1.10-1.53]) and death (adjusted HR 1.36 [95% CI 0.87-2.13]). Women with gout had an increased risk of hospitalization (adjusted HR 1.55 [95% CI 1.15-2.10]) and death (adjusted HR 2.46 [95% CI 1.12-5.41]). Similar associations with gout were observed in the unvaccinated cohort. CONCLUSION: These general population data suggest that individuals with gout, especially women, have higher risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe outcomes, even when vaccinated.

Risk of gout flares after COVID-19 vaccination: A case-crossover study.

OBJECTIVE: Routine vaccinations are associated with an increased risk of gout flares. We examined the association between COVID-19 vaccination, an immunization program implemented to a large proportion of population, and the risk of gout flares. METHODS: We conducted a time-stratified case-crossover study among patients with gout who experienced gout flares between December 2020 and September 2021, using data from The Health Improvement Network. We compared the risk of gout flares on each of the seven days on and after the day of COVID-19 vaccination vs. no vaccination during that period using conditional logistic regression. In addition, we performed subgroup analyses stratified by different COVID-19 vaccines (i.e., BNT162b2, hereafter referred to as BNT, and ChAdOx1 nCov-19, hereafter referred to as ChAd). RESULTS: Among 5,904 patients with gout (mean age: 63·1 years; 85·5% male) who experienced gout flares within one month, the risk of gout flares slightly increased on the second day after COVID-19 vaccination (odds ratio: 1·44; 95% CI: 1·02 to 2·07). The risk of gout flares also slightly increased after receiving COVID-19 vaccine on other remaining days (ORs ranged from 1·03 to 1·22); however, none of them was statistically significant. An increased risk of gout flares on the second day after vaccination was mainly observed for the ChAd vaccine (odds ratio: 1·44; 95% CI: 1·00 to 2·05), but not for BNT vaccine (odds ratio: 1·18; 95% CI: 0·67 to 2·02). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 vaccination, mainly ChAd vaccination, slightly increases the risk of gout flares on the second day after vaccination. This finding reassures the safety of COVID-19 vaccination for patients with gout.

Increased Risk of COVID-19 in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A General Population-Based Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at an increased risk of acquiring infections owing to immunologic dysfunction and use of potent immunomodulatory medications; however, few data are available on their risk of COVID-19. We estimated the rate of COVID-19 among RA participants and compared it with that of the general population. METHODS: Using the Health Improvement Network, we identified RA patients before February 2020 and followed them to September 2020. We calculated the rate of COVID-19 among participants with RA and compared it with that of the general population using a Cox proportional hazards model, adjusting for potential confounders using overlap weighting of exposure score. We repeated the same analysis among participants with osteoarthritis, a nonautoimmune rheumatic disease, as a negative control exposure. RESULTS: We identified 225 cases of suspected and confirmed COVID-19 among 17,268 RA patients, and 14,234 cases among 1,616,600 participants in the general population (1.4 versus 0.9/1,000 person-months), with the adjusted hazard ratio (HRadj ) being 1.19 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.04-1.36). Confirmed COVID-19 cases developed in 46 RA participants and in 2,249 in the general population (0.3 versus 0.1/1,000 person-months), with the HRadj being 1.42 (95% CI 1.01-1.95). No statistically significant difference was observed for suspected and confirmed (HR 1.00 [95% CI 0.93-1.07]) or confirmed (HR 1.08 [95% CI 0.92-1.27]) COVID-19 rates between participants with osteoarthritis and the general population. CONCLUSION: RA, but not osteoarthritis, was associated with an increased risk of COVID-19. Our findings provide timely evidence to support recommendations that booster vaccines and priority access to anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody treatments should be encouraged for RA patients.

Physical Distancing Measures and Walking Activity in Middle-aged and Older Residents in Changsha, China, During the COVID-19 Epidemic Period: Longitudinal Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Physical distancing measures taken to contain COVID-19 transmission may substantially reduce physical activity levels and cause individuals to adopt a more sedentary lifestyle. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to determine if there was any change in daily steps, an important component of daily physical activity, and examine risk factors for frequent low daily steps during the COVID-19 epidemic. METHODS: We used data collected from the Step Study, a population-based longitudinal study of walking activity among residents aged ≥40 years in Changsha, China. Daily steps were collected via a smartphone linked to WeChat, a social networking platform. We plotted mean daily steps and the prevalence of low daily steps (≤1500 steps/day) 30 days before (reference period) and 30 days after (epidemic period) January 21, 2020 (date of the first COVID-19 case diagnosed in Changsha), and compared it with the same corresponding period from 2019. We examined the association of risk factors with the prevalence of frequent low daily steps (≤1500 steps/day for ≥14 days) using logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 3544 participants (mean age 51.6 years; n=1226 females, 34.6%), mean daily steps dropped from 8097 to 5440 and the prevalence of low daily steps increased from 3% (2287/76,136 person-day) to 18.5% (12,951/70,183 person-day) during the reference and epidemic periods, respectively. No such phenomenon was observed during the corresponding period in 2019. Older age (P for interaction=.001) and female sex (P for interaction<.001) were both associated with a higher prevalence of frequent low daily steps and were more pronounced during the epidemic period. More education was associated with a lower prevalence of frequent low daily steps during the reference period but not the epidemic period (P for interaction=.34). Body mass index or comorbidity were not associated with frequent low daily steps during either period. CONCLUSIONS: Daily steps of Changsha residents aged ≥40 years dropped significantly during the COVID-19 period, especially among older adults and females. Although successful physical distancing, measured by the rapid downward trend in daily step counts of residents, played a critical role in the containment of the COVID-19 epidemic, our findings of an increase in the prevalence of frequent low daily steps raise concerns about unintended effects on physical activity.

Experimental study and reflection on peacetime and wartime reconstruction of large general hospitals in public health emergencies. / å¤§åž‹ç»¼åˆåŒ»é™¢åœ¨çªå‘å ¬å ±å«ç”Ÿäº‹ä»¶ä¸­å¹³æˆ˜ç»“åˆæ”¹å»ºå®žè¯ä¸Žåæ€.

To propose the architectural layout for the big general hospital in the face of public health emergencies, we analyzed the conditions, methods, problems and countermeasures for the reconstruction of the isolation ward from the existing medical building layout of a general hospital. The affected areas met the requirements of isolation ward in the reconstruction, and realized the corresponding partition and separation of people. But the cost of occupying the medical room should be concerned. General hospital should be alerted to potential risks of public health emergencies. The characteristics of different construction types, defects, and the function of the hospital should be considered in the construction, rebuilding, and expansion of the hospital, which shouldnot only meet the needs of the development of the hospital daily usage but also consider dealing with emergent public health events. We can adopt the reasonable layout, including setting up a firewall-like device between the channel and the floor, an ordinary ward at ordinary times, and an independent space for emergency by pulling down the gate. This strategy can not only avoid the problem of low utilization rate of the space occupied by the corresponding area in the ward for diseases spread by air and droplets, maximizing the efficiency of the medical site, but also avoid the problem of emergency response to the temporary reconstruction.