ABSTRACT
Introduction: Olfactory disfunction is a common marker for COVID-19 phenotype, mainly, during its acute phase. However, olfactory recovery is a controversial issue which requires further investigation. Objective(s): Verify olfactory dysfunction in health care workers with COVID-19 according to individual perception and Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center olfactory test (CCCRC OT). Method(s): A cross-sectional study was conducted in health care workers positive for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR or serological tests who perceived olfactory dysfunction. Epidemiological and clinical data were extracted, as well as time from loose, test and recovery of olfaction;and the degree of olfactory dysfunction was assessed using individual perception and CCCRC OT. Result(s): A total of 173 participants were included. CCCRC OT was performed approximately 45 days (45.08+/-20.21) after positive test. Participants were allocated into two groups according to CCCRC OT: (G1) 33/173 [19.1%] normal sense of smell;(G2) 140/173 [80.9%] altered sense of smell. The mean time of olfactory dysfunction was lower in the G1 than G2 group (9.42+/-4.99 days vs. 17.14+/- 3.74 days;P<.001);while there were no differences in the other measured moments. Full recovery was reported by 66 (38.2%) individuals, but only 33 (19.1%) individuals showed normal results at CCCRC OT. Conclusion(s): Time for initial olfactory recovery after SARS-CoV-2 infection has proved to be the best prognostic factor for complete recovery. Also, olfactory objective tests are essential for reliable assessment.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic originated in China and within about 4 months affected individuals all over the world. One of the limitations to the management of the COVID-19 is the diagnostic imaging to evaluate lung impairment and the patients' clinical evolution, mainly, in more severe cases that require admission into the intensive care unit. Among image examinations, lung ultrasound (LU) might be a useful tool to employ in the treatment of such patients. METHODS: A survey was carried out on PubMed to locate studies using the descriptors: ((Lung ultrasound OR ultrasound OR lung ultrasonography OR lung US) AND (coronavirus disease-19 OR coronavirus disease OR corona virus OR COVID-19 OR COVID19 OR SARS-CoV-2)). The period covered by the search was November 2019 to October 2020 and the papers selected reported LU in COVID-19. RESULTS: Forty-three studies were selected to produce this systematic review. The main LU findings referred to the presence of focal, multifocal and/or confluent B lines and the presence of pleural irregularities. CONCLUSIONS: The use of LU in the evaluation of patients with COVID-19 should be encouraged due to its intrinsic characteristics; a low cost, radiation free, practical method, with easy to sanitize equipment, which facilitates structural evaluation of lung damage caused by SARS-CoV-2. With the increase in the number of studies and the use of ultrasound scans, LU has been shown as a useful tool to evaluate progression, therapeutic response and follow-up of pulmonary disease in the patients with COVID-19.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Lung , Ultrasonography , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , COVID-19 Testing , Disease Progression , Humans , Lung/diagnostic imaging , PandemicsSubject(s)
Communicable Disease Control , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Federal Government , Health Services Accessibility , Healthcare Disparities , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Betacoronavirus , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19 , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Financial Support , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Humans , Indigenous Peoples , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Support , Tropical ClimateSubject(s)
Cause of Death , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks/statistics & numerical data , Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype/isolation & purification , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , COVID-19 , Female , Humans , Influenza, Human/diagnosis , Male , Prevalence , Risk Assessment , Survival Analysis , Time Factors , World Health OrganizationABSTRACT
Background and objectives: in Brazil, access to the epidemiological data of COVID-19 is scarce. Thus, it was described aspects that could be better disclosed for use in public health decision making. Methods: census data were collected on the number of cases and deaths, lethality, incidence and mortality per hundred thousand inhabitants, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) caused by SARS-CoV-2 or other virus, % of intensive care unit occupancy and social isolation, number of tests of RT-PCRs and % of tests performed against the total of samples collected. Results: there was an increase in the number of SARS in 2020 compared to cases from previous years. The number of RT-PCR tests was performed, mainly in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Some states in Brazil performed an analysis of the material collected for RT-PCR from only a portion of individuals. In Brazil, there is an apparent underreporting of cases of the disease, which can comprise about 44 thousand individuals in serious condition or deaths, as well as more than about 700 thousand individuals with mild severity or asymptomatic. Conclusion: in Brazil, there is limited access to the information that characterizes the reality of the moment in which citizens live before the COVID-19 pandemic. Epidemiological data, mainly referring to the number of new cases, deaths and hospitalizations by COVID-19 and analysis of adherence to social isolation are extremely important to enable decision-making for better management of COVID-19 in national and international level.