Comparison of clinical characteristics between fecal/perianal swab nucleic acid-positive and -negative patients with COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: We analyzed the clinical characteristics of COVID-19 fecal/perianal swab nucleic acid-positive patients in our hospital and evaluated the effect of SARS-CoV-2 on the gastrointestinal tract. METHODOLOGY: Ninety-seven patients in the Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University from January 17, 2020 to March 2, 2020 with fecal/perianal swab samples were selected as subjects and the results of real-time fluorescence reverse transcriptase-PCR SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection of fecal/perianal swabs were used to divide subjects into positive and negative groups. RESULTS: Fecal/perianal swabs of 53.61% (52/97) patients were positive including 31 males (59.62%) and 21 females (40.38%). The negative group had more females than males (P = 0.001). The distribution of case classification based on the most severe condition observed after admission was different between groups: five (5.15%) critical type patients were all from the positive group (P = 0.029). There was no statistical difference in clinical manifestations between the groups. In the positive group, the mean nucleic acid-negative conversion time was 14.13 ± 8.61 days, which was significantly later than the negative group (6.98 ± 5.16 days; P < 0.001). In the positive group, 92% (48/52) had nucleic acid-negative conversion with a mean nucleic acid-negative conversion time of 22.58 ± 10.30 days. Among them, 41 (78.85%) cases were delayed compared with pharynx/nasal swab nucleic acid-negative conversion time. CONCLUSIONS: The positive rate of fecal/perianal swab nucleic acid in male patients was higher than that in female patients. Fecal/perianal swab nucleic acid positive may be an indicator of critical conditions in those with COVID-19.

Psychological status and behavior changes of the public during the COVID-19 epidemic in China.

BACKGROUND: A cluster of pneumonia cases were reported by Wuhan Municipal Health Commission, China in December 2019. A novel coronavirus was eventually identified, and became the COVID-19 epidemic that affected public health and life. We investigated the psychological status and behavior changes of the general public in China from January 30 to February 3, 2020. METHODS: Respondents were recruited via social media (WeChat) and completed an online questionnaire. We used the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, Self-rating Depression Scale, and Symptom Checklist-90 to evaluate psychological status. We also investigated respondents' behavior changes. Quantitative data were analyzed by t-tests or analysis of variance, and classified data were analyzed with chi-square tests. RESULTS: In total, 608 valid questionnaires were obtained. More respondents had state anxiety than trait anxiety (15.8% vs 4.0%). Depression was found among 27.1% of respondents and 7.7% had psychological abnormalities. About 10.1% of respondents suffered from phobia. Our analysis of the relationship between subgroup characteristics and psychological status showed that age, gender, knowledge about COVID-19, degree of worry about epidemiological infection, and confidence about overcoming the outbreak significantly influenced psychological status. Around 93.3% of respondents avoided going to public places and almost all respondents reduced Spring Festival-related activities. At least 70.9% of respondents chose to take three or more preventive measures to avoid infection. The three most commonly used prevention measures were making fewer trips outside and avoiding contact (98.0%), wearing a mask (83.7%), and hand hygiene (82.4%). CONCLUSIONS: We need to pay more attention to public psychological stress, especially among young people, as they are likely to experience anxiety, depression, and psychological abnormalities. Different psychological interventions could be formulated according to the psychological characteristics of different gender and age groups. The majority of respondents followed specific behaviors required by the authorities, but it will take time to observe the effects of these behaviors on the epidemic.

Arbidol combined with LPV/r versus LPV/r alone against Corona Virus Disease 2019: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in Wuhan city and rapidly spread throughout China. We aimed to compare arbidol and lopinavir/ritonavir(LPV/r) treatment for patients with COVID-19 with LPV/r only. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we included adults (age≥18years) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 without Invasive ventilation, diagnosed between Jan 17, 2020, and Feb 13, 2020. Patients, diagnosed after Jan 17, 2020, were given oral arbidol and LPV/r in the combination group and oral LPV/r only in the monotherapy group for 5-21 days. The primary endpoint was a negative conversion rate of coronavirus from the date of COVID-19 diagnosis(day7, day14), and assessed whether the pneumonia was progressing or improving by chest CT (day7). RESULTS: We analyzed 16 patients who received oral arbidol and LPV/r in the combination group and 17 who oral LPV/r only in the monotherapy group, and both initiated after diagnosis. Baseline clinical, laboratory, and chest CT characteristics were similar between groups. The SARS-CoV-2 could not be detected for 12(75%) of 16 patients' nasopharyngeal specimens in the combination group after seven days, compared with 6 (35%) of 17 in the monotherapy group (p < 0·05). After 14 days, 15 (94%) of 16 and 9 (52·9%) of 17, respectively, SARS-CoV-2 could not be detected (p < 0·05). The chest CT scans were improving for 11(69%) of 16 patients in the combination group after seven days, compared with 5(29%) of 17 in the monotherapy group (p < 0·05). CONCLUSION: In patients with COVID-19, the apparent favorable clinical response with arbidol and LPV/r supports further LPV/r only.