Telemedicine technologies and applications in the era of COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Telemedicine services saw substantial surges in their use during the COVID-19 pandemic due to the lockdowns and characteristics of the pandemic. Therefore, the authors aimed to systematically review the telemedicine services provided during the COVID-19 pandemic and their potential applications. METHODS: The authors searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases on September 14, 2021. Then, the retrieved records underwent two-step title/abstract and full-text screening processes, and the eligible articles were included for qualitative synthesis. RESULTS: The review of studies demonstrated that the telephone is listed 38 times, making it the most common technology used in telemedicine. Video conferencing is also mentioned in 29 articles, as well as other technologies: Mobile-health (n = 15), Virtual reality (n = 7). According to the findings of the present study, Tele-follow-up (n = 24), Tele-consulting (n = 20), Virtual visits (20), and Tele-monitoring (n = 18) were the most widely used telemedicine applications. CONCLUSION: Telemedicine has been an effective approach to COVID-19 management. Telemedicine technology is going to play a key role in the future of health medicine, patient consultation, and many other extended applications of health care in remote rural locations.

Is There a Role for Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy in Reducing Long-Term COVID-19 Sequelae?

The COVID-19 pandemic has plagued our society for approximately three years [...].

COVID-19 in Pediatrics: A Systematic Review of Current Knowledge and Practice.

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2 is the novel coronavirus that causes severe acute respiratory syndrome and could afflict individuals from all walks of life. Children are usually asymptomatic or represent non-specific mild to moderate symptoms; therefore, they often remain undiagnosed and could be potential reservoirs and silent carriers of the virus. Despite the global attention to COVID-19 and its importance in public health, some clinical and paraclinical aspects of this disease in children are still unclear. Thus, we conducted a comprehensive systematic review of available literature to reflect on the current knowledge and practice of the disease among children. METHODS: This study was a systematic review of current evidence conducted in October 2020. We performed a systematic search using the keywords in online databases. The investigation adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist to ensure the reliability and validity of extracted literature and results. RESULTS: We selected and reviewed 23 most related studies out of 1744 identified papers in an initial online search based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the present review; of whom 13 were original research studies, and 10 were letters to the editors, commentaries, viewpoints, consensus statements, and perspectives. Although due to the origin of the current pandemic, China was the country with the most publications (12 articles), data from several countries have been included in this review. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 can also affect children and cause systemic disease with several internal organ involvements. However, the prevalence, severity, and diversity of the symptoms in children are less than in adults. Cough and fever appear to be some of the most common symptoms, followed by other symptoms such as gastrointestinal manifestations. Comorbidities increase the risk of severe COVID-19 in children, and those without underlying conditions are very unlikely to suffer from severe disease. Mental health issues such as anxiety and depression due to the isolated situation caused by pandemics are common findings in children of early ages and should be seriously considered in current practice.

Mucormycosis infection in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Several reports previously described mucormycosis co-infection in patients with COVID-19. As mucormycosis and COVID-19 co-infection might adversely affect patients' outcomes, we aimed to systematically review the related evidence and the subsequent outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of relevant articles searching the keywords in the online databases of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science. All the records from the start of the pandemic until June 12th, 2021 underwent title/abstract and then full-text screening process, and the eligible studies were included. We did not include any language or time restrictions for the included studies. RESULTS: We found 31 eligible studies reporting 144 total cases of COVID-19 and mucormycosis co-infection. The nose, cranial sinuses, and orbital cavity were the most commonly involved organs, although the cerebrum, lungs, and heart were also involved in the studies. Pre-existing diabetes mellitus (DM), as well as corticosteroid use, were the most commonly identified risk factors, but other underlying conditions and immunomodulatory drug use were also present in several cases. Aspergillus was the most commonly reported micro-organism that caused further co-infections in patients with concurrent COVID-19 and mucormycosis. As most of the studies were case reports, no reliable estimate of the mortality rate could be made, but overall, 33.6% of the studied cases died. CONCLUSION: Early diagnosis of mucormycosis co-infection in COVID-19 patients and selecting the right treatment plan could be a challenge for physicians. Patients with underlying co-morbidities, immunocompromised patients, and those receiving corticosteroids are at higher risk of developing mucormycosis co-infection and it is crucial to have an eye examination for early signs and symptoms suggesting a fungal infection in these patients.

The effects of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) on coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19): a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Oxygenation serves as a cornerstone in the treatment of COVID-19, and several methods have been extensively studied so far. Herein, we aimed to systematically review the studies discussing hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) to examine its reported efficacy and adverse events in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We systematically searched and retrieved the relevant articles using keywords on the online databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases up to April 11th, 2021. The retrieved records underwent a two-step title/abstract and full-text screening process, and the eligible papers were identified. National Institutes of health (NIH) quality assessment tool was used for this study. This study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with ID CRD42021269821. RESULTS: Eight articles from three countries were included. All the included studies had good and fair quality scores, with no poor studies included in this systematic review (Good: n = 5, Fair: n = 3). Studies were divided into clinical trials and case reports/series. Most of the studies used HBOT less than 1.5-2 absolute atmospheres (ATA) for 90 min sessions and thereafter sessions were decreased to 60 min. Trials demonstrated most of the patients recovered after receiving HBOT, and blood oxygen saturation increased after several sessions of HBOT. CONCLUSION: Overall, HBOT seems to be a safe and effective oxygenation method in patients with COVID-19. However, there is limited knowledge and evidence regarding the effects and mechanism of HBOT in COVID-19 treatment, and further evaluations require extensive well-designed studies.

Reinfection risk of novel coronavirus (COVID-19): A systematic review of current evidence.

BACKGROUND: There is recently a concern regarding the reinfection and reactivation of previously reCoVered coronavirus disease 2019 (CoVID-19) patients. AIM: To summarize the recent findings and reports of CoVID-19 reinfection in patients previously reCoVered from the disease. METHODS: This study was a systematic review of current evidence conducted in August 2020. The authors studied the probable reinfection risk of novel coronavirus (CoVID-19). We performed a systematic search using the keywords in online databases. The investigation adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist to ensure the reliability and validity of this study and results. RESULTS: We reviewed 31 studies. Eight studies described reCoVered patients with reinfection. Only one study reported reinfected patients who died. In 26 studies, there was no information about the status of the patients. Several studies indicated that reinfection is not probable and that post-infection immunity is at least temporary and short. CONCLUSION: Based on our review, we concluded that a positive polymerase chain reaction retest could be due to several reasons and should not always be considered as reinfection or reactivation of the disease. Most relevant studies in positive retest patients have shown relative and probably temporary immunity after the reCoVery of the disease.