COVID-19: Presumed Infection Routes and Psychological Impact on Staff in Administrative and Logistics Departments in a Designated Hospital in Wuhan, China.

Objective: Our aim was to explore the presumed infection routes and psychological impact of COVID-19 on staff in administrative and logistics departments (ALDs). Methods: We gathered data from all 18 staff members with COVID-19 in ALDs in Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, China. The baseline, job before diagnosis, presumed infection environment, use of protective equipment, and psychological status before and after diagnosis were collected and analyzed. A total of 18 uninfected staff members working alongside them in the same environment and 18 random matched infected doctors and nurses formed two control groups; the psychological impact of these three groups was then compared. Results: Of the 18 members of staff, 88.89% were infected due to the working environment (hospital), and nine had face-to-face conversations with doctors and nurses in their daily work. Many staff members did not take any protective measures in their routine work. Before they were diagnosed, 12 staff members were aware of the seriousness of the epidemic, and most of the staff maintained a neutral attitude to the COVID-19 outbreak. A total of 77.78% of the staff experienced psychological stress or emotional changes after diagnosis, which were mainly caused by family health and disease related issues. Most of them managed their emotions by self-control and video calls with their families. There was no significant difference in psychological impact among the three groups, but uninfected staff members were fully aware of the seriousness of the epidemic. Conclusions: Effective protective measures should be taken for staff members in ALDs. Psychological interventions are very important to help infected staff members in ALDs cope with psychological distress.

Gender Differences in Psychological and Behavioral Responses of Infected and Uninfected Health-Care Workers During the Early COVID-19 Outbreak.

Objective: Understanding gender differences in responses of health-care workers (HCWs) to COVID-19 outbreak is an effective way to promote customized supports. Methods: During February 2020, 103 HCWs infected with COVID-19 (64 females and 39 males) and 535 uninfected HCWs (383 females and 152 males) were recruited in a cross-sectional study. Level of attention, six emotional status, and self-evaluation of eight protective measures were recorded. Multivariable Firth's logistic regressions were applied to explored independent effect of gender. Results: During early outbreak, female HCWs were more likely to give greater attention, adjusted OR:1.92 (95%CI 1.14-3.23) in total HCWs. Higher proportion of anxiety was observed in female HCWs, adjusted OR:3.14 (95%CI 1.98-4.99) for total HCWs, 4.32(95%CI 1.32-14.15) for infected HCWs and 2.97 (1.78, 4.95) for uninfected HCWs. Proportion of pessimism, fear, full of fighting spirit, and optimism were low, and no gender differences were observed. During a later outbreak, a majority of HCWs reported being very familiar with eight protective measures. After training, a proportion of high self-evaluation in hand hygiene, wearing gloves, and surgical masks increased independently in female HCWs, and adjusted ORs were 3.07 (95% CI 1.57-5.99), 2.37 (95% CI 1.26-4.49), and 1.92 (95% CI 1.02-3.62), respectively. Infection status amplified gender difference in anxiety, hand hygiene, and glove wearing. Conclusion: Female HCWs perceived the outbreak seriously, effective emotional and psychological well-ness should be targeted at female HCWs preferentially, and male HCWs should be encouraged to express their feelings and be further trained.

Chemoprophylaxis, diagnosis, treatments, and discharge management of COVID-19: An evidence-based clinical practice guideline (updated version).

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of a rapidly spreading illness, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), affecting more than seventeen million people around the world. Diagnosis and treatment guidelines for clinicians caring for patients are needed. In the early stage, we have issued "A rapid advice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infected pneumonia (standard version)"; now there are many direct evidences emerged and may change some of previous recommendations and it is ripe for develop an evidence-based guideline. We formed a working group of clinical experts and methodologists. The steering group members proposed 29 questions that are relevant to the management of COVID-19 covering the following areas: chemoprophylaxis, diagnosis, treatments, and discharge management. We searched the literature for direct evidence on the management of COVID-19, and assessed its certainty generated recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of ungraded consensus-based statement. Finally, we issued 34 statements. Among them, 6 were strong recommendations for, 14 were weak recommendations for, 3 were weak recommendations against and 11 were ungraded consensus-based statement. They covered topics of chemoprophylaxis (including agents and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) agents), diagnosis (including clinical manifestations, reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), respiratory tract specimens, IgM and IgG antibody tests, chest computed tomography, chest x-ray, and CT features of asymptomatic infections), treatments (including lopinavir-ritonavir, umifenovir, favipiravir, interferon, remdesivir, combination of antiviral drugs, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, interleukin-6 inhibitors, interleukin-1 inhibitors, glucocorticoid, qingfei paidu decoction, lianhua qingwen granules/capsules, convalescent plasma, lung transplantation, invasive or noninvasive ventilation, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO)), and discharge management (including discharge criteria and management plan in patients whose RT-PCR retesting shows SARS-CoV-2 positive after discharge). We also created two figures of these recommendations for the implementation purpose. We hope these recommendations can help support healthcare workers caring for COVID-19 patients.

Re-positive Cases of Nucleic Acid Tests in Discharged Patients With COVID-19: A Follow-Up Study.

Background: The frequent emergence of the re-positive patients with COVID-19 is a potential threat worldwide. This study aimed to describe data from admission to follow-up for patients with COVID-19 and analyze the possible causes for re-positive nucleic acid tests to provide more scientific basis for reducing the numbers of re-positive patients after discharge. Methods: We retrospectively recorded 15 patients with COVID-19 admitted to the Xianyang Central Hospital, China. The baseline, exposure histories, clinical syndromes, laboratory characteristics, nucleic acid, and follow-up tests were analyzed, and the radiological characteristics of re-positive patient at different periods were compared. Results: Eight (53.33%) patients had the history of travel to Wuhan, four (26.67%) patients had close contact with confirmed patients, and one (6.67%) patient had close contact with suspected patients. After treatment, all patients had two consecutively negative nucleic acid tests and were discharged from hospital. All patients were followed up for more than 14 days, and the average time from discharge to the first follow-up was 14.67 ± 3.31 days (from 9 to 22 days). Most patients showed no clinical symptoms and negative nucleic acid tests, while one patient had an itchy throat, her CT scan showed a light density shadow in the right lower lobe of the lung, and the nucleic acid was once again positive. The second follow-up of the other 14 patients (except the re-positive one) was conducted 20.80 ± 7.78 days (from 13 to 30 days) after discharge, and all of them had negative nucleic acid tests. The positive patient was immediately readmitted and received a new round of treatment. Her family members and colleagues remained healthy until now. Conclusions: The quality of nucleic acid testing reagents should be enhanced, and the training of nucleic acid sampling operators should be strengthened to reduce the false-negative results in the nucleic acid of SARS-CoV-2; the clinical specimens of throat and nasopharynx swabs can be collected at the same time; IgM- and IgG-specific antibodies of SARS-CoV-2 should be carried out for discharged patients; the radiological characteristics should be evaluated strictly; and the discharge standard can be specified according to the baseline and severity of disease of patients.

Perceived infection transmission routes, infection control practices, psychosocial changes, and management of COVID-19 infected healthcare workers in a tertiary acute care hospital in Wuhan: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Many healthcare workers were infected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) early in the epidemic posing a big challenge for epidemic control. Hence, this study aims to explore perceived infection routes, influencing factors, psychosocial changes, and management procedures for COVID-19 infected healthcare workers. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional, single hospital-based study. We recruited all 105 confirmed COVID-19 healthcare workers in the Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University from February 15 to 29, 2020. All participants completed a validated questionnaire. Electronic consent was obtained from all participants. Perceived causes of infection, infection prevention, control knowledge and behaviour, psychological changes, symptoms and treatment were measured. RESULTS: Finally, 103 professional staff with COVID-19 finished the questionnaire and was included (response rate: 98.1%). Of them, 87 cases (84.5%) thought they were infected in working environment in hospital, one (1.0%) thought their infection was due to the laboratory environment, and 5 (4.9%) thought they were infected in daily life or community environment. Swab of throat collection and physical examination were the procedures perceived as most likely causing their infection by nurses and doctors respectively. Forty-three (41.8%) thought their infection was related to protective equipment, utilization of common equipment (masks and gloves). The top three first symptoms displayed before diagnosis were fever (41.8%), lethargy (33.0%) and muscle aches (30.1%). After diagnosis, 88.3% staff experienced psychological stress or emotional changes during their isolation period, only 11.7% had almost no emotional changes. Arbidol (Umifenovir; an anti-influza drug; 69.2%) was the drug most commonly used to target infection in mild and moderate symptoms. CONCLUSION: The main perceived mode of transmission was not maintaining protection when working at a close distance and having intimate contact with infected cases. Positive psychological intervention is necessary.

A rapid advice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infected pneumonia (standard version).

In December 2019, a new type viral pneumonia cases occurred in Wuhan, Hubei Province; and then named "2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)" by the World Health Organization (WHO) on 12 January 2020. For it is a never been experienced respiratory disease before and with infection ability widely and quickly, it attracted the world's attention but without treatment and control manual. For the request from frontline clinicians and public health professionals of 2019-nCoV infected pneumonia management, an evidence-based guideline urgently needs to be developed. Therefore, we drafted this guideline according to the rapid advice guidelines methodology and general rules of WHO guideline development; we also added the first-hand management data of Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University. This guideline includes the guideline methodology, epidemiological characteristics, disease screening and population prevention, diagnosis, treatment and control (including traditional Chinese Medicine), nosocomial infection prevention and control, and disease nursing of the 2019-nCoV. Moreover, we also provide a whole process of a successful treatment case of the severe 2019-nCoV infected pneumonia and experience and lessons of hospital rescue for 2019-nCoV infections. This rapid advice guideline is suitable for the first frontline doctors and nurses, managers of hospitals and healthcare sections, community residents, public health persons, relevant researchers, and all person who are interested in the 2019-nCoV.