The Effects of Covid-19 on Financial-Economic and Performance Efficiency of Hospitals.

Background: During the pandemic of COVID-19, the function and performance of hospitals have been affected by various economic-financial and management aspects. The aim of the current study was to assess the process of therapeutic care delivery and also the economic-financial functions of the selected hospitals before and after COVID-19. Methods: This research is a descriptive-analytical study and a cross-sectional-comparative study in terms of time, and it was conducted in several selected teaching hospitals of Iran University of Medical Sciences. A purposeful and convenient sampling method was used. The data has been collected using the standard research tool (standard checklist of the Ministry of Health) in the two areas of financial-economic and healthcare performance (such as Data of financial and economic indicators such as direct and indirect costs, liquidity ratio and profitability index as well as key performance indicators of hospitals such as bed occupancy ratio (BOR; %), average length of stay (ALOS), bed turnover rate (BTR), bed turnover distance rate (BTIR) and hospital mortality rate (HMR), physician-to-bed ratio and nurse-to-bed ratio) of hospitals in two times before and after the outbreak of COVID-19 (time period 2018 to 2021). The data was collected from 2018 to 2021. Pearson/Spearman regression was used for the evaluation of the relationship between variables using SPSS 22. Results: This research showed the admission of COVID-19 patients caused a change in the indicators we evaluated. ALOS (-6.6%), BTIR (-40.7%), and discharge against medical advice (-7.0%) decreased from 2018 to 2021. BOR; % (+5.0%), occupy bed days (+6.6%), BTR (+27.5%, HMR (+50%), number of inpatients (+18.8%), number of discharges (+13.1%), number of surgeries (+27.4%), nurse-per-bed ratio (+35.9%), doctor-per-bed ratio (+31.0%) increased in the same period of time. The profitability index was correlated to all of the performance indicators except for the net death rate. Higher length of stay and turnover interval had a negative effect on the profitability index while higher bed turnover rate, bed occupancy ratio, bed day, number of inpatient admission, and number of surgery had a positive effect on the profitability index. Conclusion: It has been shown from the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the performance indicators of the studied hospitals were negatively affected. As a consequence of the COVID-19 epidemic, many hospitals were not able to deal with the negative financial and medical outcomes of this crisis due to a significant decrease in income and a double increase in expenses.

Adverse effects following COVID-19 vaccination in Iran.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination is a key intervention to prevent COVID-19. Many vaccines are administered globally, yet there is not much evidence regarding their safety and adverse effects. Iran also faces this challenge, especially as data regarding the Sputnik V vaccine is sparse. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine the adverse effects of the most commonly used vaccines in Iran. METHODS: Using a retrospective cohort study design, 6600 subjects aged 18 years or older who had received two doses of any of the three COVID-19 vaccines (Sinopharm, AstraZeneca, and Sputnik V) were selected using a random sampling method between March and August 2021. Subjects were asked about any adverse effects of the vaccines by trained interviewers via telephone interview. Vaccine-related adverse effects in individuals during the first 72 h and subsequently following both doses of the vaccines were determined. The demographic variables, type of administered vaccine, adverse effects, and history of the previous infection with COVID-19 were collected. Descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation) and analytical statistics (Chi-squared and Wilcoxon tests) were performed at a 95% significance level using STATA software version 15 (STATA Corp, College Station, TX, USA). RESULTS: From 6600 participants, 4775 responded (response rate = 72.3%). Of the participants, 1460 (30.6%) received the AstraZeneca vaccine, 1564 (32.8%) received the Sinopharm vaccine and 1751 (36.7%) received the Sputnik V vaccine. 2653 participants (55.56%) reported adverse effects after the first dose and 1704 (35.7%) after the second dose. Sputnik V caused the most adverse effects with 1449 (82.7%) vaccine recipients reporting symptoms after the first or second dose, compared with 1030 (70.5%) for AstraZeneca and only 585 (37.4%) for the Sinopharm vaccine. The most common adverse effects after the first dose were fatigue (28.37%), chill/fever (26.86%), and skeletal pain (22.38%). These three adverse effects were the same for the second dose, although their prevalence was lower. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we demonstrate that the Sputnik V vaccine has the highest rate of adverse effects, followed by the AstraZeneca and Sinopharm vaccines. COVID-19 vaccines used in Iran are safe and there were no reports of serious adverse effects.

COVID-19 in Iran: What was done and what should be done.

The current COVID-19 pandemic started in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. The World health Organization (WHO) declared the COVID-19 as a public health emergency of international concern on January 30, 2020, and recognized the situation as a pandemic on March 11, 2020. Around 135 million confirmed cases and around 2.9 million deaths until the first week of April 2021 have been among its direct impacts on human health. All countries have been affected in different degrees, and each of them has used different strategies to protect themselves against health and nonhealth consequences of this epidemic. Although all approaches are full of mistakes with fatal and painful results, some of them were successful in limiting the epidemic. One of the astonishing improvements is development of several vaccines in a relatively short period of time, which has increased hopes for epidemic control. This review aims to critically appraise the strategies for COVID-19 epidemic control in Iran since the beginning of the disease until the fourth peak of disease in March 2021.

Effect of Arbidol (Umifenovir) on COVID-19: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of patients with COVID-19 has included supportive care to mainly relief symptoms of the disease. Although World Health Organization (WHO) has not recommended any effective treatments for COVID-19, there are some reports about use of antiviral drugs. The aim of this study is to determine the effect of Arbidol (ARB) on COVID-19 disease. METHODS: Using an open-label randomized controlled trial, we examined the efficacy of ARB in patients with COVID-19 in a teaching hospital. One hundred eligible patients with diagnosis of COVID-19 were recruited in the study and assigned randomly to two groups of either hydroxychloroquine followed by KALETRA (Lopinavir/ritonavir) or hydroxychloroquine followed by ARB. The primary outcome was hospitalization duration and clinical improvement 7 days after admission. The criteria of improvement were relief of cough, dyspnea, and fever. Time to relief from fever was also assessed across the two groups. Without any dropouts, 100 patients were entered into the study for the final analysis at significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 56.6 (17.8) years and 56.2 (14.8) years in ARB and KALETRA groups, respectively. Majority of patients were male across two groups (66 and 54%). The duration of hospitalization in ARB group was significantly less than KALETRA arm (7.2 versus 9.6 days; P = 0.02). Time to relief fever was almost similar across two groups (2.7 versus 3.1 days in ARB and KALETRA arms, respectively). Peripheral oxygen saturation rate was significantly different after 7 days of admission across two groups (94% versus 92% in ARB and KALETRA groups respectively) (P = 0.02). Based on multiple linear regression analysis, IHD, Na level, and oxygen saturation at the time of admission and type of therapy were the independent adjusted variables that determined the duration of hospitalization in patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Our findings showed that Arbidol, compared to KALETRA, significantly contributes to clinical and laboratory improvements, including peripheral oxygen saturation, requiring ICU admissions, duration of hospitalization, chest CT involvements, WBC, and ESR. We suggest further studies on ARB against COVID-19 using larger sample size and multicenter design. TRIAL REGISTRATION: IRCT20180725040596N2 on 18 April 2020.