ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, face masks have been among the cornerstones of COVID-19 prevention. Therefore, evaluating their preventive effects against COVID-19 is crucial. This review aimed to systematically search for the systematic review articles that explored the role of various types of face masks in preventing COVID-19. METHODS: We browsed the keywords of this study in the online databases of Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane on 10th January 2023 and retrieved all the relevant systematic review articles. The records were downloaded into an Endnote file, and the duplicates were removed. A two-step screening process consisting of title/abstract and full-text screenings was conducted to select the most relevant articles. To ensure the validity and reliability of the results, this study adhered to the PRISMA protocol. RESULTS: A total of 28 systematic reviews were included in this review. Most studies found that face masks are beneficial against viral respiratory infections, such as COVID-19. Different types of masks were evaluated in included studies. It appeared that mask efficacy depends on the material, layers, fitting on the face and user compliance. N 95 respirator had maximum efficacy, especially when used continuously. CONCLUSION: Face masks have a beneficial effect against COVID-19. Home masks are less protective than surgical masks or N95 personal breathing masks. Besides, the use of masks may elicit a false sense of security in people, which may lead to poor hand hygiene and violation of social distancing. Therefore, the necessary training should be provided to the public to increase awareness and encourage the right practice of using the mask, emphasizing the preventive effects of washing hands, social distancing, and using a face mask against COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Smoking status appears to lead to a poor prognosis in COVID-19 patients. However, findings from the studies conducted on this topic have not been consistent, and further exploration is required. Methods: The objective of this umbrella review was to examine the effects of smoking on COVID-19 management and mortality. Online databases that included PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched using relevant keywords up to July 27, 2022. Articles were restricted to the English language, and the PRISMA protocol was followed. Results: A total of 27 systematic reviews, published from 2020 to 2022, were included. Individual studies included in the systematic reviews ranged from 8 to 186, with various population sizes. The consensus from the majority of systematic reviews was that COVID-19 smoker patients experience greater disease severity, disease progression, hospitalization rate, hospital admission duration, mechanical ventilation, ICU admission, and mortality rate. Conclusions: COVID-19 patients with a history of smoking (current and former) are vulnerable to adverse hospital outcomes and worse COVID-19 progression. Effective preventive and supportive approaches are required to decrease the risk of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality in patients with a history of smoking.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Earlier reports described the possibility of higher SARS-CoV-2 infection and severity in patients with hematological malignancies. Given the importance and incidence of these malignancies, we aimed to systematically review SARS-CoV-2 infection and severity in patients with hematologic cancers. METHODS: We retrieved the relevant records by searching the keywords in online databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Scopus on December 31st , 2021. A two-step screening; title/abstract and full-text screening, was employed to select the eligible studies. These eligible studies entered the final qualitative analysis. The study is adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist to ensure the reliability and validity of the results. RESULTS: Forty studies concerning different hematologic malignancies and the effect of COVID-19 infection on them were included in the final analysis. The findings showed that in general, the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the severity of the disease are often higher in hematologic malignancies and the patients could experience higher morbidity and mortality compared to general populations. CONCLUSION: It appeared that individuals with hematologic malignancies are more vulnerable to COVID-19 infection and they experience more severe disease with higher mortality rates. The presence of other comorbidities could also deteriorate this situation. Further Investigation is recommended to evaluate the outcome of COVID-19 infection in different subtypes of hematologic malignancies.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Several clinical manifestations have been discovered for COVID-19 since the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, which can be classified into early, medium, and long-term complications. However, late complications can be present after recovery from acute COVID-19 illness. The present study aims to comprehensively review the available evidence of late complications related to COVID-19. Method: A search was conducted, using keywords, through electronic databases, which included Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase up to August 29, 2022. Study selection was performed according to a strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist was followed, and studies were appraised using the National Institute of Health (NIH) quality assessment and risk of bias tool. Results: In total, 50 studies were included, and nine distinct COVID-19 late complication categories were identified. A review of these studies revealed that neurologic and psychiatric (n=41), respiratory (n=27), musculoskeletal and rheumatologic (n=22), cardiovascular (n=9), and hepatic and gastrointestinal (n=6) complications were the most prevalent complications of long COVID-19. Conclusion: Almost all human body systems are affected by late complications of COVID-19 with different severity and prevalence. Fatigue and some other neuropsychiatric symptoms are the most common late complications among long COVID-19 patients. Respiratory symptoms including dyspnea (during exercise), cough, and chest tightness were the next most prevalent long-term complications of COVID-19. Since these complications are persistent and late, being aware of the signs and symptoms is essential for the healthcare providers and patients.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Rare serious complications have been documented after COVID-19 vaccination as clinical research proceeded and new target populations, such as children and pregnant women, were included. In this study, we attempted to review the literature relevant to pregnancy complications and maternal outcomes of COVID-19 immunization in pregnant women. . Methods: We searched the databases of PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science on 31 August 2022. The records were downloaded and underwent a two-step screening; 1) title/abstract and then 2) full-text screening to identify the eligible studies. We included English original studies that evaluated the adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy. Information such as the type of study, geographical location, type of vaccine injected, gestational age, maternal underlying diseases, and complications following the vaccination were extracted into pre-designed tables. Results: According to the findings of included studies, in most of them vaccination had a positive impact and no negative effects were observed. Also, no medical history was reported in 11 articles, and pregnant women had no underlying diseases. Some serious adverse events were reported after vaccination, including miscarriage, paresthesia, uterine contraction, vaginal bleeding, preterm birth, major congenital anomalies, intrauterine growth restriction, and seizure. . Conclusion: Because of limited data availability and the cross-sectional design of most studies, we could neither infer causation between vaccines and incidence of adverse effects nor comment with certainty about any possible adverse outcome of COVID-19 vaccines in vaccinated pregnant women. Consequently, more longitudinal and experimental studies are needed to define the exact adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women.
ABSTRACT
Background and Aims: Alteration in humans' gut microbiota was reported in patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). The gut and upper respiratory tract (URT) microbiota harbor a dynamic and complex population of microorganisms and have strong interaction with host immune system homeostasis. However, our knowledge about microbiota and its association with SARS-CoV-2 is still limited. We aimed to systematically review the effects of gut microbiota on the SARS-CoV-2 infection and its severity and the impact that SARS-CoV-2 could have on the gut microbiota. Methods: We searched the keywords in the online databases of Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and Cochrane on December 31, 2021. After duplicate removal, we performed the screening process in two stages; title/abstract and then full-text screening. The data of the eligible studies were extracted into a pre-designed word table. This study adhered to the PRISMA checklist and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale Bias Assessment tool. Results: Sixty-three publications were included in this review. Our study shows that among COVID-19 patients, particularly moderate to severe cases, the gut and lung microbiota was different compared to healthy individuals. In addition, the severity, and viral load of COVID-19 disease would probably also be influenced by the gut, and lung microbiota's composition. Conclusion: Our study concludes that there was a significant difference in the composition of the URT, and gut microbiota in COVID-19 patients compared to the general healthy individuals, with an increase in opportunistic pathogens. Further, research is needed to investigate the probable bidirectional association of COVID-19 and human microbiome.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Controversies existed regarding the duration of COVID-19 vaccines' protection and whether receiving the usual vaccine doses would be sufficient for long-term immunity. Therefore, we aimed to systematically review the studies regarding the COVID-19 vaccines' protection three months after getting fully vaccinated and assess the need for vaccine booster doses. Methods: The relevant literature was searched using a combination of keywords on the online databases of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane on September 17th, 2021. The records were downloaded and the duplicates were removed. Then, the records were evaluated in a two-step process, consisting of title/abstract and full-text screening processes, and the eligible records were selected for the qualitative synthesis. We only included original studies that evaluated the efficacy and immunity of COVID-19 vaccines three months after full vaccination. This review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement to ensure the reliability of results. Results: Out of the 797 retrieved records, 12 studies were included, 10 on mRNA-based vaccines and two on inactivated vaccines. The majority of included studies observed acceptable antibody titers in most of the participants even after 6 months; however,it appeared that the titers could also decrease in a considerable portion of people. Due to the reduction in antibody titers and vaccine protection, several studies suggested administering the booster dose, especially for older patients and those with underlying conditions, such as patients with immunodeficiencies. Conclusion: Studies indicated that vaccine immunity decreases over time, making people more susceptible to contracting the disease. Besides, new variants are emerging, and the omicron variant is continuing to spread and escape from the immune system, indicating the importance of a booster dose.