ABSTRACT
Current data suggests that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) survivors experience long-lasting problems. It is not yet understood how long these symptoms last. The goal of this study was to compile all the data that was currently available to evaluate COVID-19's long-term effects at 12 months and above. We looked for studies published by December 15, 2022, in PubMed and Embase that discussed follow-up findings for COVID-19 survivors who had been alive for at least a year. A random-effect model was carried out to determine the combined prevalence of different long-COVID symptoms. The Joanna Briggs Institute tool was used to assess the risk of bias for the included studies, and the I2 statistics were used to evaluate the heterogeneity. After reviewing 3,209 studies, 46 were deemed admissible, with an aggregate COVID-19 population of 17976. At 12 months and above, 57% of patients reported a minimum of one symptom, and the five most prevalent symptoms were: dyspnea on exertion (34%, 95% CI 0.2; 0.94); difficulty in concentration (32%, 95% CI 0.16; 0.52); fatigue (31%, 95% CI 0.22; 0.40); frailty (31%, 95% CI 0.06; 0.78); and arthromyalgia (28%, 95% CI 0.09; 0.6). The findings of the present study showed that at 12 months and beyond, a sizable fraction of COVID-19 survivors still have lasting symptoms that impair several body systems. Long-COVID patients require an urgent understanding of pathophysiological processes and the development of tailored treatments.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: During this pandemic everyone is facing the wrath of this novel coronavirus but nurses who are meticulously working in closed contact with diseased are at more risk for developing anxiety, depression and compromised quality of life. This study was conducted with an intent to identify anxiety, depression and quality of life and its predictors among nurses who are actively involved in caring of COVID-19 patients. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was carried out among nurses who were actively involved in COVID-19 duties at government tertiary health care institutes of India and data was collection through convenience sampling. Standardized tools (HADS, WHOQOL-BREF) were preferred for the assessment of participants' anxiety, depression and quality of life. Multivariate regression analysis was used to identify predictors for anxiety and depression. RESULTS: Of 354 nurses, 12.1% were suffering from anxiety while 14.7% had depression. Mean score for physical, psychological, social and environmental domains were 14.75 ± 1.86, 14.92 ± 2.46, 15.21 ± 3.01, and 14.48 ± 2.38 respectively. Nurses' education was a significant predictor for anxiety (odds ratio [OR] = -0.262, 95% CI: -0.510- -0.014, and P value = 0.038). Similarly for depression, designation of nurses acts as a contributing factor (odds ratio [OR] = 0.287, 95% CI: 0.016- 0.557, and P value = 0.038). CONCLUSION: Nurses are providing their services beyond boundaries so that we can overcome with hard time of COVID-19 pandemic. Although less but still nurses are suffering from anxiety and depression which need to be addressed to protect and enhance their mental well-being.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Novel coronavirus is believed to be tiny enough (0.08-0.14 µm) to penetrate through face mask, thus protection offered by cloth mask may be too low. However, the use of cloth face mask in community has been recommended by the United States Centre for Disease Control and Prevention and regulatory bodies of other countries. There is paucity of literature on efficacy of cloth face mask in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection transmission; thus, this review aims to update the available most recent evidences on efficacy of cloth face masks in prevention of viral infection transmission. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Clinical Trials Register for identifying studies related to this review using free-text terms and MeSH terms. Both experimental and observational studies on efficacy of cloth masks which were published in English language have been included in this review except expert opinions, commentaries, editorials, and review articles. Twelve studies were eligible to be included in review for data extraction and qualitative synthesis was carried out from extracted data but quantitative analysis (meta-analysis) could not be performed because of serious heterogeneity between the studies. RESULTS: Cloth face masks show minimum efficacy in source control than the medical grade mask. The efficacy of cloth face masks filtration varies and depends on the type of material used, number of layers, and degree of moisture in mask and fitting of mask on face. CONCLUSION: Cloth face masks have limited efficacy in combating viral infection transmission. However, it may be used in closed, crowded indoor, and outdoor public spaces involving physical proximity to prevent spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection.