Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Hematol Transfus Cell Ther ; 2022 Sep 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2041787

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Knowledge, Attitude and Practices (KAP) surveys prove beneficial to the transfusion services by providing an insight into the donors and, thus, aiding in mobilizing and retaining voluntary blood donors. We aim to study the knowledge, attitude and practices of donors towards blood donation in a pandemic setting. METHODS: A cross-sectional observational study to assess the knowledge, attitude and practices of blood donors was conducted between June to and October 2020. Non-parametric tests (Mann - Whitney U and Kruskal - Wallis) were performed to evaluate the relation of knowledge, attitude and practices overall scores with age group, gender and history of blood donations (first vs. repeat). The Chi-Square test/Fisher's Exact test was used to evaluate the differences in the distribution of Knowledge, Attitude and Practices items within the groups. RESULTS: A total of 403 of 2,748 individuals who came for whole blood donation participated in the study. The mean age of the study population was 31.1years (SD ± 8.4 range: 18 - 58), with 75% of the donors donating for the first time. The fear of acquiring COVID-19 infection was perceived as a major reason for the eligible population not to donate. The overall knowledge, attitude and practice score among the donors was satisfactory, being 76.14%, with a significant association with age. The overall positive attitude and practices scores of blood donors were 85.48% and 78.04%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The KAP scores were satisfactory among the donors. Timely communication of the precautionary measures at blood centers to contain the spread of the COVID-19 infection and effective counseling would help in motivating and retaining blood donors.

2.
Mycoses ; 65(6): 613-624, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1794602

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Candida auris is an emerging multidrug-resistant pathogen in intensive care settings (ICU). During the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic, ICU admissions were overwhelmed, possibly contributing to the C. auris outbreak in COVID-19 patients. OBJECTIVES: The present systematic review addresses the prevalence, underlying diseases, iatrogenic risk factors, treatment and outcome of C. auris infections in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science and LitCovid databases were systematically searched with appropriate keywords from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2021. RESULTS: A total of 97 cases of C. auris were identified in COVID-19 patients. The pooled prevalence of C. auris infections (encompassing candidemia and non-candidemia cases) in COVID-19 patients was 14%. The major underlying diseases were diabetes mellitus (42.7%), hypertension (32.9%) and obesity (14.6%), followed by the iatrogenic risk factors such as a central venous catheter (76.8%%), intensive care unit (ICU) stay (75.6%) and broad-spectrum antibiotic usage (74.3%). There were no significant differences in underlying disease and iatrogenic risk factors among C. auris non-candidemia/colonisation and C. auris candidemia cases. The mortality rate of the total cohort is 44.4%, whereas, in C. auris candidemia patients, the mortality was 64.7%. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the prevalence of C. auris infections remains unchanged in the COVID-19 pandemic. Hospital-acquired risk factors may contribute to the clinical illness. Proper infection control practices and hospital surveillance may stop future hospital outbreaks during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Candidemia , Antifungal Agents/pharmacology , Antifungal Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , Candida , Candida auris , Candidemia/drug therapy , Candidemia/epidemiology , Drug Resistance, Multiple , Humans , Iatrogenic Disease/epidemiology , Microbial Sensitivity Tests , Pandemics , Prevalence , Risk Factors , Treatment Outcome
3.
Saudi J Biol Sci ; 28(8): 4437-4441, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1199074

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus pandemic has caused a global public health crisis with an unprecedented shutdown of major establishments and non-emergency services. Disruptions across the country in dental hospitals led to challenges in addressing patient's dental complaints. The present study aimed to analyse the difference in the pattern of the Outpatient dental visits during the pandemic period in comparison to that of the pre-pandemic period in a tertiary care hospital. This retrospective study was carried out by retrieving the patient data from the diagnostic register of the Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology for a period of one year. The data that was retrieved from 24th September 2019 to 23rd March 2020 was categorized under the pre-pandemic period and the data from 24th March 2020 to 24th September 2020 was grouped under the pandemic period. Patient data regarding the age, gender and clinical diagnosis was recorded and categorized under three main categories: "Emergency", "urgent" and "elective". 7550 patients during pre-pandemic period and 4035 patients during the pandemic period visited the dental hospital during the study period. Under the "emergency dental care" category, during the pre-pandemic period, majority of the cases reported of acute dental pain (71.0%) followed by cellulitis and space infection (20.1%) and maxillofacial trauma (8.7%). During the pandemic period, acute dental pain consisted of all emergency visits (n = 307). The proportion of emergency dental visits during the pandemic were significantly higher than the pre-pandemic period. Elective dental visits were significantly higher during pre-pandemic period in comparison to the pandemic period. (P < 0.001). There was a notable change in the outpatient trend of the dental visits during the COVID-19 pandemic in comparison to the pre-pandemic period. Emergency dental services were utilized at a higher rate during the pandemic period in comparison to the pre-pandemic counterpart.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL