Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): a scoping review.

BackgroundIn December 2019, a pneumonia caused by a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in Wuhan, China and has rapidly spread around the world since then.AimThis study aims to understand the research gaps related to COVID-19 and propose recommendations for future research.MethodsWe undertook a scoping review of COVID-19, comprehensively searching databases and other sources to identify literature on COVID-19 between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020. We analysed the sources, publication date, type and topic of the retrieved articles/studies.ResultsWe included 249 articles in this scoping review. More than half (59.0%) were conducted in China. Guidance/guidelines and consensuses statements (n = 56; 22.5%) were the most common. Most (n = 192; 77.1%) articles were published in peer-reviewed journals, 35 (14.1%) on preprint servers and 22 (8.8%) posted online. Ten genetic studies (4.0%) focused on the origin of SARS-CoV-2 while the topics of molecular studies varied. Nine of 22 epidemiological studies focused on estimating the basic reproduction number of COVID-19 infection (R0). Of all identified guidance/guidelines (n = 35), only ten fulfilled the strict principles of evidence-based practice. The number of articles published per day increased rapidly until the end of January.ConclusionThe number of articles on COVID-19 steadily increased before 6 February 2020. However, they lack diversity and are almost non-existent in some study fields, such as clinical research. The findings suggest that evidence for the development of clinical practice guidelines and public health policies will be improved when more results from clinical research becomes available.

Potentially effective drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 or MIS-C in children: a systematic review.

The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of using potential drugs: remdesivir and glucocorticoid in treating children and adolescents with COVID-19 and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in treating MIS-C. We searched seven databases, three preprint platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google from December 1, 2019, to August 5, 2021, to collect evidence of remdesivir, glucocorticoid, and IVIG which were used in children and adolescents with COVID-19 or MIS-C. A total of nine cohort studies and one case series study were included in this systematic review. In terms of remdesivir, the meta-analysis of single-arm cohort studies have shown that after the treatment, 54.7% (95%CI, 10.3 to 99.1%) experienced adverse events, 5.6% (95%CI, 1.2 to 10.1%) died, and 27.0% (95%CI, 0 to 73.0%) needed extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or invasive mechanical ventilation. As for glucocorticoids, the results of the meta-analysis showed that the fixed-effect summary odds ratio for the association with mortality was 2.79 (95%CI, 0.13 to 60.87), and the mechanical ventilation rate was 3.12 (95%CI, 0.80 to 12.08) for glucocorticoids compared with the control group. In terms of IVIG, most of the included cohort studies showed that for MIS-C patients with more severe clinical symptoms, IVIG combined with methylprednisolone could achieve better clinical efficacy than IVIG alone. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the current evidence in the included studies is insignificant and of low quality. It is recommended to conduct high-quality randomized controlled trials of remdesivir, glucocorticoids, and IVIG in children and adolescents with COVID-19 or MIS-C to provide substantial evidence for the development of guidelines. WHAT IS KNOWN: • The efficacy and safety of using potential drugs such as remdesivir, glucocorticoid, and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in treating children and adolescents with COVID-19/MIS-C are unclear. WHAT IS NEW: • Overall, the current evidence cannot adequately demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of using remdesivir, glucocorticoids, and IVIG in treating children and adolescents with COVID-19 or MIS-C. • We are calling for the publication of high-quality clinical trials and provide substantial evidence for the development of guidelines.

Guidelines for the Management of Children and Adolescent with COVID-19: protocol for an update.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a constant threat to people's lives, bringing huge challenges to the global public health and medical service system. In order to ensure the timeliness and reliability of the recommendations in guidelines, the working group of the Rapid Advice Guidelines for Management of Children with COVID-19 decided to update the guideline to incorporate the latest evidence to guide the management of COVID-19 in children and adolescent. METHODS: We will update the guidelines, originally developed as a rapid advice guideline, into a standard guideline. We will follow the clinical practice guideline (CPG) update manuals of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the Spanish National Health System (SNHS). The updated guidelines will also follow the RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) checklist and Checklist for the Reporting of Updated Guidelines (CheckUp). DISCUSSION: Through systematic search, evaluation and grading of the best available relevant clinical evidence, combined with the experience of frontline clinical experts in the fight against the epidemic and the wishes of patients and their caretakers, we will update our previous rapid advice guidelines into a high-quality, implementable standard guidelines for the management of COVID-19 in children and adolescent. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The standard guideline update has been registered at the International Practice Guidelines Registry Platform (http://guidelines-registry.cn/?lang=en, registration No. IPGRP-2020CN101).

Family exposure and the impact of containment measures to children with coronavirus disease 2019 outside Hubei, China: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: In response to the ongoing epidemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), China has carried out restrictive disease containment measures across the country. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we collected demographic and epidemiological data of 376 laboratory-confirmed cases of COVID-19 among children younger than 18 years of age. Using descriptive statistics and odds ratios, we described the odds of exposure outside the family after the implementation of control measures compared to before. RESULTS: Children diagnosed on or after February 4, 2020, had a lower odds of exposure to COVID-19 outside of the family compared to those diagnosed before February 3, 2020 (OR =0.594, 95% CI: 0.391 to 0.904). In the stratified analysis, children aged 0 to 5 years had the lowest odds of exposure outside of the family (OR =0.420, 95% CI: 0.196 to 0.904) compared to the other age groups assessed. CONCLUSIONS: Our study on the children infected with COVID-19 as well as their exposure within family provided evidence that the implementation of containment measures was effective in reducing the odds of exposure outside of the family, especially for preschool children. Continuation of these efforts, coupled with tailored prevention and health education messaging for younger aged children, may help to reduce the transmission of COVID-19 among children until other therapeutic interventions or vaccines are available.

Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: a systematic review of published case studies.

BACKGROUND: Many cases have been reported recently on multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), a newly emerged disease that seemed to correlate with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aim of this review was to describe the clinical features, treatment and outcomes of MIS-C, as well as to assess the risk of bias of published case studies, analyzing their reporting quality. METHODS: We searched all articles reporting on multisystem inflammatory condition in children and adolescents in the context of COVID-19 through MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science, China Biology Medicine disc (CBM) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) from their inception to June 17, 2020. We used CARE and IHE checklists to evaluate the risk of bias and quality of the included studies. We combined the data of clinical manifestations, imaging findings, treatments and outcomes using STATA version 15. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies were included, with a total of 270 participants. Most cases were from Europe and the United States, and the terms of MIS-C in different articles were varied. Fever and gastrointestinal symptoms were the most experienced symptoms. Shock, rash, conjunctivitis, lips or oral cavity changes, hand and feet anomalies, and lymphadenopathy were observed, while respiratory symptoms seemed relatively infrequent. Seventy-eight percent to 100% of patients had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 by serology [86% (95% CI: 78%, 95%)] were more than those by RT-PCR [36% (95% CI: 26%, 46%)]. Most patients had one or more increased inflammatory markers including C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), ferritin, interleukin-6 (IL-6), and D-dimer, accompanied by neutrophilia and lymphopenia. Impaired cardiac function was seen from elevated biomarkers and abnormal echocardiography. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), anticoagulants, inotropic agents and glucocorticoids were the main treatments, along with other intensive supportive care. Overall, the outcomes of MIS-C were favorable, and only one death was recorded. In terms of the quality assessment of included studies, most of the case studies did not follow the standard reporting checklist, so that they failed to get higher scores in the risk of bias assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with MIS-C present with symptoms more severe than children with COVID-19, with fever and gastrointestinal symptoms as the primary manifestations and multisystem involvement, particularly cardiovascular system. Longer follow-up and further researches for the pathophysiology of MIS-C are urgently needed. In addition, attention should be paid to the quality of case studies to improve the completeness and transparency of scientific reports.

Anxiety and Depression Among Imaging Doctors in Post-COVID-19 Period.

To investigate the mental state of medical imaging staff in Shandong Province, China, who have been on the forefront of the COVID-19 epidemic during its late stage in China. Questionnaires designed to assess anxiety and depression were administered on-location, and 5331 complete results were collected. SPSS software was used for statistical descriptions and analysis. Rates of anxiety disorders and depression among medical imaging workers in Shandong Province, China, were 6.1% and 6.5%, respectively, higher than those of anxiety and depression in Chinese residents before the epidemic. The outbreak in Xinjiang, China; virus mutation in Japan; and spread of the epidemic due to occupational errors were the primary reported causes of anxiety and depression among image workers. Medical imaging workers showed evidence of psychological abnormalities during the late stage of the epidemic in China.

Early estimation of the case fatality rate of COVID-19 in mainland China: a data-driven analysis.

BACKGROUND: An ongoing outbreak of pneumonia caused by a novel coronavirus [severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2], named COVID-19, hit a major city of China, Wuhan in December 2019 and subsequently spread to other provinces/regions of China and overseas. Several studies have been done to estimate the basic reproduction number in the early phase of this outbreak, yet there are no reliable estimates of case fatality rate (CFR) for COVID-19 to date. METHODS: In this study, we used a purely data-driven statistical method to estimate the CFR in the early phase of the COVID-19 outbreak. Daily numbers of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths were collected from January 10 to February 3, 2020 and divided into three clusters: Wuhan city, other cities of Hubei province, and other provinces of mainland China. Simple linear regression model was applied to estimate the CFR from each cluster. RESULTS: We estimated that CFR during the first weeks of the epidemic ranges from 0.15% (95% CI: 0.12-0.18%) in mainland China excluding Hubei through 1.41% (95% CI: 1.38-1.45%) in Hubei province excluding the city of Wuhan to 5.25% (95% CI: 4.98-5.51%) in Wuhan. CONCLUSIONS: Our early estimates suggest that the CFR of COVID-19 is lower than the previous coronavirus epidemics caused by SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV).

Follow-up Study of Long-time Positive RT-PCR in Stool Specimens From Asymptomatic Children Infected With SARS-CoV-2.

In the current study, we report on 4 children with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, of which 3 of them were asymptomatic. These patients had both pharyngeal swabs and anal swabs testing during hospital or after discharge. All the 4 children showed long-time positive viral RNA in the stool specimens after pharyngeal swabs turned negative during the follow-up stage, especially in the asymptomatic children. The positive RNA in stool specimens of asymptomatic children last for more than 54 days after admission or 30 days after discharge.

Erratum to rapid advice guidelines for management of children with COVID-19.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.21037/atm-20-3754.].

Supportive care for patient with respiratory diseases: an umbrella review.

BACKGROUND: Supportive treatment is an important and effective part of the management for patients with life-threatening diseases. This study aims to identify and evaluate the forms of supportive care for patients with respiratory diseases. METHODS: An umbrella review of supportive care for patient with respiratory diseases was undertaken. We comprehensively searched the following databases: Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), Wanfang Data and CBM (SinoMed) from their inception to 31 March 2020, and other sources to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses related to supportive treatments for patient with respiratory diseases including Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and influenza. We assessed the methodological quality using the AMSTAR score and the quality of the evidence for the primary outcomes of each included systematic review and meta-analysis. RESULTS: We included 18 systematic reviews and meta-analyses in this study. Most studies focused on the respiratory and circulatory support. Ten studies were of high methodological quality, five studies of medium quality, and three studies of low quality. According to four studies extracorporeal membrane oxygenation did not reduce mortality in adults [odds ratio/relative risk (OR/RR) ranging from 0.71 to 1.28], but two studies reported significantly lower mortality in patients receiving venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation than in the control group (OR/RR ranging from 0.38 to 0.73). Besides, monitoring of vital signs and increasing the number of medical staff may also reduce the mortality in patients with respiratory diseases. CONCLUSIONS: Our overview suggests that supportive care may reduce the mortality of patients with respiratory diseases to some extent. However, the quality of evidence for the primary outcomes in the included studies was low to moderate. Further systematic reviews and meta-analyses are needed to address the evidence gap regarding the supportive care for SARS, MERS and COVID-19.

Effectiveness and safety of glucocorticoids to treat COVID-19: a rapid review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Glucocorticoids are widely used in the treatment of various pulmonary inflammatory diseases, but they are also often accompanied by significant adverse reactions. Published guidelines point out that low dose and short duration systemic glucocorticoid therapy may be considered for patients with rapidly progressing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) while the evidence is still limited. METHODS: We comprehensively searched electronic databases and supplemented the screening by conducting a manual search. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies evaluating the effectiveness and safety of glucocorticoids in children and adults with COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and conducted meta-analyses of the main indicators that were identified in the studies. RESULTS: Our search retrieved 23 studies, including one RCT and 22 cohort studies, with a total of 13,815 patients. In adults with COVID-19, the use of systemic glucocorticoid did not reduce mortality [risk ratio (RR) =2.00, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.69 to 5.75, I2=90.9%] or the duration of lung inflammation [weighted mean difference (WMD) =-1 days, 95% CI: -2.91 to 0.91], while a significant reduction was found in the duration of fever (WMD =-3.23 days, 95% CI: -3.56 to -2.90). In patients with SARS, glucocorticoids also did not reduce the mortality (RR =1.52, 95% CI: 0.89 to 2.60, I2=84.6%), duration of fever (WMD =0.82 days, 95% CI: -2.88 to 4.52, I2=97.9%) or duration of lung inflammation absorption (WMD =0.95 days, 95% CI: -7.57 to 9.48, I2=94.6%). The use of systemic glucocorticoid therapy prolonged the duration of hospital stay in all patients (COVID-19, SARS and MERS). CONCLUSIONS: Glucocorticoid therapy was found to reduce the duration of fever, but not mortality, duration of hospitalization or lung inflammation absorption. Long-term use of high-dose glucocorticoids increased the risk of adverse reactions such as coinfections, so routine use of systemic glucocorticoids for patients with COVID-19 cannot be recommend.

Potential effectiveness and safety of antiviral agents in children with coronavirus disease 2019: a rapid review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 outbreak presents a new, life-threatening disease. Our aim was to assess the potential effectiveness and safety of antiviral agents for COVID-19 in children. METHODS: Electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane library, CBM, CNKI, and Wanfang Data) from their inception to March 31, 2020 were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), clinical controlled trials and cohort studies of interventions with antiviral agents for children (less than 18 years of age) with COVID-19. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies with 6,008 patients were included. There was no direct evidence and all of evidence were indirect. The risks of bias in all studies were moderate to high in general. The effectiveness and safety of antiviral agents for children with COVID-19 is uncertain: For adults with COVID-19, lopinavir/ritonavir had no effect on mortality [risk ratio (RR) =0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.45 to 1.30]. Arbidol and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) had no benefit on probability of negative PCR test (RR =1.27; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.73; RR =0.93; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.18) respectively. For adults with SARS, interferon was associated with reduced corticosteroid dose [weighted mean difference (WMD) = -0.14 g; 95% CI, -0.21 to -0.07] but had no effect on mortality (RR =0.72; 95% CI, 0.28 to 1.88); ribavirin did not reduce mortality (RR =0.68; 95% CI, 0.43 to 1.06) and was associated with high risk of severe adverse reactions; and oseltamivir had no effect on mortality (RR =0.87; 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.38). Ribavirin combined with interferon was also not effective in adults with MERS and associated with adverse reactions. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence showing the effectiveness of antiviral agents for children with COVID-19, and the clinical efficacy of existing antiviral agents is still uncertain. We do not suggest clinical routine use of antivirals for COVID-19 in children, with the exception of clinical trials.

A follow-up study of children infected with SARS-CoV-2 from western China.

BACKGROUND: To clarify the characteristic and the duration of positive nucleic acid in children infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), including asymptomatic children. METHODS: A total of 32 children confirmed with SARS-CoV-2 infection between January 24 and February 12, 2020 from four provinces in western China were enrolled in this study and followed up until discharge and quarantine 14 days later. RESULTS: Eleven children (34%) were asymptomatic, among whom six children had normal computed tomographic (CT) scan images. Age and gender were not associated with clinical symptoms or the results of CT scan in children infected with SARS-CoV-2. The concentrations of white blood cells and neutrophils were higher in children with asymptomatic infection than in children with clinical symptoms or CT abnormalities. Patients who presented with CT abnormalities had lower D-dimer or lower total bilirubin than those who had normal CT scan but clinical symptoms. All children recovered and no one died or was admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). The mean duration of positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid was 15.4 (SD =7.2) days and similar for both asymptomatic children and children with symptoms or CT abnormalities. We found a significant negative correlation between the lymphocyte count and the duration of positive nucleic acid test. CONCLUSIONS: Children with asymptomatic infection should be quarantined for the same duration as symptomatic patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. The clinical significance and mechanism behind the negative correlation between the number of lymphocytes and the duration of positive SARS-CoV-2 needs further study.

Epidemiological and Clinical Characteristics of 26 Asymptomatic Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Carriers.

BACKGROUND: We retrospectively analyzed 26 persistently asymptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) carriers. METHODS: Epidemiological and clinical characteristics from the 26 asymptomatic patients with positive results for SARS-CoV-2 ribonucleic acid testing were obtained. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients (84.6%) correlated with clustering occurrence. The median period from contact to diagnosis and the last positive nucleic acid test was 19 (8-24 days) and 21.5 days (10-36 days), respectively. The median period from diagnosis to negative nucleic acid test was significantly different between patients with normal or atypical chest computed tomography (CT) findings (n = 16, 61.5%; 7.5 days [2-20 days]) and patients with typical ground-glass or patchy opacities on CT (n = 10, 38.5%; 12.5 days [8-22 days]; P < .01). Seven patients (70.0%) with initial positive nucleic acid test results had a negative result simultaneously with improved CT findings. Obvious improvement in CT findings was observed in 3 patients (30.0%) despite positive nucleic acid test results. CONCLUSIONS: In asymptomatic patients, changes in biochemical and inflammatory variables are small and changes on chest CT can occur. It is worth noting that the long existence of SARS-CoV-2 in some asymptomatic patients and false-negative results need to be considered in SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test.

Breastfeeding of infants born to mothers with COVID-19: a rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Existing recommendations on whether mothers with COVID-19 should continue breastfeeding are still conflicting. We aimed to conduct a rapid review of mother-to-child transmission of COVID-19 during breastfeeding. METHODS: We systematically searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China Biology Medicine disc, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and preprint articles up to March 2020. We included studies relevant to transmission through milk and respiratory droplets during breastfeeding of mothers with COVID-19, SARS, MERS and influenza. Two reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 4,481 records were identified in our literature search. Six studies (five case reports and one case series) involving 58 mothers (16 mothers with COVID-19, 42 mothers with influenza) and their infants proved eligible. Five case reports showed that the viral nucleic acid tests for all thirteen collected samples of breast milk from mothers with COVID-19 were negative. A case series of 42 influenza infected postpartum mothers taking precautions (hand hygiene and wearing masks) before breastfeeding showed that no neonates were infected with influenza during one-month of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence indicates that SARS-CoV-2 viral nucleic acid has not been detected in breast milk. The benefits of breastfeeding may outweigh the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in infants. Mothers with COVID-19 should take appropriate precautions to reduce the risk of transmission via droplets and close contact during breastfeeding.

Effectiveness of intravenous immunoglobulin for children with severe COVID-19: a rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) is usually used as supportive therapy, but the treatment of COVID-19 by IVIG is controversial. This rapid review aims to explore the clinical effectiveness and safety of IVIG in the treatment of children with severe COVID-19. METHODS: We systematically searched the literature on the use of IVIG in patients with COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), including both adults and children. We assessed the risk of bias and quality of evidence and reported the main findings descriptively. RESULTS: A total of 1,519 articles were identified by initial literature search, and finally six studies met our inclusion criteria, included one randomized controlled trial (RCT), four case series and one case report involving 198 patients. One case series showed the survival of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was not improved by IVIG. One case report showed high-dose IVIG could improve the outcome of COVID-19 adults. Three observational studies showed inconsistent results of the effect of IVIG on SARS patients. One RCT showed that IVIG did not reduce mortality or the incidence of nosocomial infection in adults with severe SARS. The quality of evidence was between low and very low. CONCLUSIONS: The existing evidence is insufficient to support the efficacy or safety of IVIG in the treatment of COVID-19.

Nosocomial infections among patients with COVID-19, SARS and MERS: a rapid review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19, a disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, has now spread to most countries and regions of the world. As patients potentially infected by SARS-CoV-2 need to visit hospitals, the incidence of nosocomial infection can be expected to be high. Therefore, a comprehensive and objective understanding of nosocomial infection is needed to guide the prevention and control of the epidemic. METHODS: We searched major international and Chinese databases: Medicine, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, CBM (China Biology Medicine disc), CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) and Wanfang database for case series or case reports on nosocomial infections of COVID-19, SARS (severe acute respiratory syndromes) and MERS (Middle East respiratory syndrome) from their inception to March 31st, 2020. We conducted a meta-analysis of the proportion of nosocomial infection patients in the diagnosed patients, occupational distribution of nosocomial infection medical staff. RESULTS: We included 40 studies. Among the confirmed patients, the proportions of nosocomial infections with early outbreaks of COVID-19, SARS, and MERS were 44.0%, 36.0%, and 56.0%, respectively. Of the confirmed patients, the medical staff and other hospital-acquired infections accounted for 33.0% and 2.0% of COVID-19 cases, 37.0% and 24.0% of SARS cases, and 19.0% and 36.0% of MERS cases, respectively. Nurses and doctors were the most affected among the infected medical staff. The mean numbers of secondary cases caused by one index patient were 29.3 and 6.3 for SARS and MERS, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of nosocomial infection in patients with COVID-19 was 44% in the early outbreak. Patients attending hospitals should take personal protection. Medical staff should be awareness of the disease to protect themselves and the patients.

Application of telemedicine during the coronavirus disease epidemics: a rapid review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: As COVID-19 has become a global pandemic, early prevention and control of the epidemic is extremely important. Telemedicine, which includes medical advice given over telephone, Internet, mobile phone applications or other similar ways, may be an efficient way to reduce transmission and pressure on medical institutions. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, CBM, CNKI and Wanfang databases for literature on the use of telemedicine for COVID-19, SARS and MERS from their inception to March 31st, 2020. We included studies about the content of the consultation (such as symptoms, therapy and prevention, policy, public service), screening of suspected cases, the provision of advice given to those people who may have symptoms or contact history. We conducted meta-analyses on the main outcomes of the studies. RESULTS: A total of 2,041 articles were identified after removing duplicates. After reading the full texts, we finally included nine studies. People were most concerned about symptoms (64.2%), epidemic situation and public problems (14.5%), and psychological problems (10.3%) during COVID-19 epidemic. During the SARS epidemic, the proportions of people asking for consultation for symptoms, prevention and therapy, and psychological problems were 35.0%, 22.0%, and 23.0%, respectively. Two studies demonstrated that telemedicine can be used to screen the suspected patients and give advice. One study emphasized the limited possibilities to follow up people calling hotlines and difficulties in identifying all suspect cases. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine services should focus on the issues that the public is most concerned about, such as the symptoms, prevention and treatment of the disease, and provide reasonable advice to patients with symptoms or people with epidemic history.