COVID-19 is associated with the risk of cardiovascular disease death: A two-sample Mendelian randomization study

Objective This study aimed to estimate the causal effects of Coronavirus disease 2019 susceptibility and hospitalization on cardiovascular disease death using two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis. Methods We used statistics from a genome-wide association study. A total of 2,568,698 participants were assessed in this study, including 1,299,010 in Coronavirus disease 2019 susceptibility databases, 908,494 in Coronavirus disease 2019 hospitalization database, and 361,194 in a cardiovascular disease death database. We performed two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis using the inverse variance weighted method. As sensitivity analysis techniques, Mendelian randomization-Egger regression, heterogeneity analyses, and Leave-one-out analysis were employed. Reverse Mendelian randomization analysis was used to detect reverse causality. Statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05. Results Coronavirus disease 2019 susceptibility may be a causal factor for cardiovascular disease death (β = 2.188 × 10–3, P = 0.002), which involves five common single nucleotide polymorphisms. Similarly, Coronavirus disease 2019 hospitalization may also be a causal factor for cardiovascular disease death (β = 8.626 × 10–4, P = 0.010), which involves nine common single nucleotide polymorphisms. Furthermore, sensitivity and reverse Mendelian randomization analysis suggested that no heterogeneity, horizontal pleiotropy or reverse causality was found between Coronavirus disease 2019 and cardiovascular disease death. Conclusion Our bidirectional Mendelian randomization analysis showed a causal relationship between Coronavirus disease 2019 susceptibility and hospitalization associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease death.

Evidence-Based Optimization of the Mandarin Version of the Post Stroke Checklist: A Mixed Methods Study (preprint)

Background: The Post Stroke Checklist has been proved to be feasible and useful in standardizing the process for long-term post-stroke care and we developed a Mandarin version of it (M-PSC). However, it is not capable of enforcing follow-up care after stroke and further optimization is needed. Methods: : Participants were consecutively recruited from 13 departments in a specialized hospital on the discharge date. The trained clinicians contacted them by telephone calls at six months since the most recent diagnosis. A satisfaction questionnaire was sent to the participant whilst clinicians completed a satisfaction questionnaire and the Pragmatic Face and Content Validity Test (PRAC-Test). Then, a debriefing meeting was held to discuss potential problems of the M-PSC. Quantitative and qualitative data were both collected from April 2021 to May 2021. Results: : A total of 167 individuals consented to take part in the study.113 participants completed the assessment at six months and three were excluded due to missing data. The M-PSC identified a wide range of unmet needs related to stroke and at least one need was reported in 76.4% of participants. The average time taken to administer the M-PSC was 8 mins. Satisfaction ratings were high for participants (8.5/10) and clinicians (9.6/10). Totally 31 further screenings were conducted and 33 appropriate referrals were accomplished. Several areas for improvement were identified and revised. Conclusions: : The M-PSC is a feasible and useful measure in enforcing follow-up care and promising to be an approach in standardizing post-stroke follow-up practice in telehealth during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.