Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Front Psychol ; 11: 1501, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1903116

ABSTRACT

Objective: Our aim was to explore the presumed infection routes and psychological impact of COVID-19 on staff in administrative and logistics departments (ALDs). Methods: We gathered data from all 18 staff members with COVID-19 in ALDs in Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, China. The baseline, job before diagnosis, presumed infection environment, use of protective equipment, and psychological status before and after diagnosis were collected and analyzed. A total of 18 uninfected staff members working alongside them in the same environment and 18 random matched infected doctors and nurses formed two control groups; the psychological impact of these three groups was then compared. Results: Of the 18 members of staff, 88.89% were infected due to the working environment (hospital), and nine had face-to-face conversations with doctors and nurses in their daily work. Many staff members did not take any protective measures in their routine work. Before they were diagnosed, 12 staff members were aware of the seriousness of the epidemic, and most of the staff maintained a neutral attitude to the COVID-19 outbreak. A total of 77.78% of the staff experienced psychological stress or emotional changes after diagnosis, which were mainly caused by family health and disease related issues. Most of them managed their emotions by self-control and video calls with their families. There was no significant difference in psychological impact among the three groups, but uninfected staff members were fully aware of the seriousness of the epidemic. Conclusions: Effective protective measures should be taken for staff members in ALDs. Psychological interventions are very important to help infected staff members in ALDs cope with psychological distress.

2.
Chin Med J (Engl) ; 134(17): 2131-2133, 2021 Aug 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1769420
3.
Lancet ; 396(10249): 479-488, 2020 08 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-666142

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This is the first randomised controlled trial for assessment of the immunogenicity and safety of a candidate non-replicating adenovirus type-5 (Ad5)-vectored COVID-19 vaccine, aiming to determine an appropriate dose of the candidate vaccine for an efficacy study. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial of the Ad5-vectored COVID-19 vaccine was done in a single centre in Wuhan, China. Healthy adults aged 18 years or older, who were HIV-negative and previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection-free, were eligible to participate and were randomly assigned to receive the vaccine at a dose of 1 × 1011 viral particles per mL or 5 × 1010 viral particles per mL, or placebo. Investigators allocated participants at a ratio of 2:1:1 to receive a single injection intramuscularly in the arm. The randomisation list (block size 4) was generated by an independent statistician. Participants, investigators, and staff undertaking laboratory analyses were masked to group allocation. The primary endpoints for immunogenicity were the geometric mean titres (GMTs) of specific ELISA antibody responses to the receptor binding domain (RBD) and neutralising antibody responses at day 28. The primary endpoint for safety evaluation was the incidence of adverse reactions within 14 days. All recruited participants who received at least one dose were included in the primary and safety analyses. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04341389. FINDINGS: 603 volunteers were recruited and screened for eligibility between April 11 and 16, 2020. 508 eligible participants (50% male; mean age 39·7 years, SD 12·5) consented to participate in the trial and were randomly assigned to receive the vaccine (1 × 1011 viral particles n=253; 5 × 1010 viral particles n=129) or placebo (n=126). In the 1 × 1011 and 5 × 1010 viral particles dose groups, the RBD-specific ELISA antibodies peaked at 656·5 (95% CI 575·2-749·2) and 571·0 (467·6-697·3), with seroconversion rates at 96% (95% CI 93-98) and 97% (92-99), respectively, at day 28. Both doses of the vaccine induced significant neutralising antibody responses to live SARS-CoV-2, with GMTs of 19·5 (95% CI 16·8-22·7) and 18·3 (14·4-23·3) in participants receiving 1 × 1011 and 5 × 1010 viral particles, respectively. Specific interferon γ enzyme-linked immunospot assay responses post vaccination were observed in 227 (90%, 95% CI 85-93) of 253 and 113 (88%, 81-92) of 129 participants in the 1 × 1011 and 5 × 1010 viral particles dose groups, respectively. Solicited adverse reactions were reported by 183 (72%) of 253 and 96 (74%) of 129 participants in the 1 × 1011 and 5 × 1010 viral particles dose groups, respectively. Severe adverse reactions were reported by 24 (9%) participants in the 1 × 1011 viral particles dose group and one (1%) participant in the 5 × 1010 viral particles dose group. No serious adverse reactions were documented. INTERPRETATION: The Ad5-vectored COVID-19 vaccine at 5 × 1010 viral particles is safe, and induced significant immune responses in the majority of recipients after a single immunisation. FUNDING: National Key R&D Programme of China, National Science and Technology Major Project, and CanSino Biologics.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Viral Vaccines/adverse effects , Viral Vaccines/immunology , Adenoviridae , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Vaccines , China , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Double-Blind Method , Female , Genetic Vectors , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , T-Lymphocytes/immunology , Viral Vaccines/administration & dosage , Young Adult
4.
Mil Med Res ; 7(1): 24, 2020 05 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-232557

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Many healthcare workers were infected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) early in the epidemic posing a big challenge for epidemic control. Hence, this study aims to explore perceived infection routes, influencing factors, psychosocial changes, and management procedures for COVID-19 infected healthcare workers. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional, single hospital-based study. We recruited all 105 confirmed COVID-19 healthcare workers in the Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University from February 15 to 29, 2020. All participants completed a validated questionnaire. Electronic consent was obtained from all participants. Perceived causes of infection, infection prevention, control knowledge and behaviour, psychological changes, symptoms and treatment were measured. RESULTS: Finally, 103 professional staff with COVID-19 finished the questionnaire and was included (response rate: 98.1%). Of them, 87 cases (84.5%) thought they were infected in working environment in hospital, one (1.0%) thought their infection was due to the laboratory environment, and 5 (4.9%) thought they were infected in daily life or community environment. Swab of throat collection and physical examination were the procedures perceived as most likely causing their infection by nurses and doctors respectively. Forty-three (41.8%) thought their infection was related to protective equipment, utilization of common equipment (masks and gloves). The top three first symptoms displayed before diagnosis were fever (41.8%), lethargy (33.0%) and muscle aches (30.1%). After diagnosis, 88.3% staff experienced psychological stress or emotional changes during their isolation period, only 11.7% had almost no emotional changes. Arbidol (Umifenovir; an anti-influza drug; 69.2%) was the drug most commonly used to target infection in mild and moderate symptoms. CONCLUSION: The main perceived mode of transmission was not maintaining protection when working at a close distance and having intimate contact with infected cases. Positive psychological intervention is necessary.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Health Personnel/psychology , Infection Control/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Adult , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , China , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Exposure , Personal Protective Equipment , SARS-CoV-2 , Stress, Psychological , Surveys and Questionnaires , Tertiary Care Centers , Young Adult
5.
Mil Med Res ; 7(1): 17, 2020 04 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-31673

ABSTRACT

On 6 February 2020, our team had published a rapid advice guideline for diagnosis and treatment of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infection, and this guideline provided our experience and make well reference for fighting against this pandemic worldwide. However, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a new disease, our awareness and knowledge are gradually increasing based on the ongoing research findings and clinical practice experience; hence, the strategies of diagnosis and treatment are also continually updated. In this letter, we answered one comment on our guideline and provided the newest diagnostic criteria of "suspected case" and "confirmed case" according to the latest Diagnosis and Treatment Guidelines for COVID-19 (seventh version) that issued by the National Health Committee of the People's Republic of China.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Pneumonia, Viral , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , China , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Mil Med Res ; 7(1): 4, 2020 02 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-405

ABSTRACT

In December 2019, a new type viral pneumonia cases occurred in Wuhan, Hubei Province; and then named "2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)" by the World Health Organization (WHO) on 12 January 2020. For it is a never been experienced respiratory disease before and with infection ability widely and quickly, it attracted the world's attention but without treatment and control manual. For the request from frontline clinicians and public health professionals of 2019-nCoV infected pneumonia management, an evidence-based guideline urgently needs to be developed. Therefore, we drafted this guideline according to the rapid advice guidelines methodology and general rules of WHO guideline development; we also added the first-hand management data of Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University. This guideline includes the guideline methodology, epidemiological characteristics, disease screening and population prevention, diagnosis, treatment and control (including traditional Chinese Medicine), nosocomial infection prevention and control, and disease nursing of the 2019-nCoV. Moreover, we also provide a whole process of a successful treatment case of the severe 2019-nCoV infected pneumonia and experience and lessons of hospital rescue for 2019-nCoV infections. This rapid advice guideline is suitable for the first frontline doctors and nurses, managers of hospitals and healthcare sections, community residents, public health persons, relevant researchers, and all person who are interested in the 2019-nCoV.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections , Cross Infection , Infection Control , Mass Screening , Personal Protective Equipment , Pneumonia, Viral , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Diagnosis, Differential , Drugs, Chinese Herbal , Evidence-Based Medicine , Fluid Therapy , Humans , Infection Control/standards , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Molecular Epidemiology , Nursing Care , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/etiology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL